Rainbow Trout Feasibility Study
Final Report
2018
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
i
Prepared for:
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY & FISHERIES
CHIEF DIRECTORATE: AQUACULTURE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Private Bag X 2
Vlaeberg
8018
Prepared by:
URBAN-ECON DEVELOPMENT ECONOMISTS
Lake View Office Park, First Floor
137 Muckleneuk Street
Brooklyn
Pretoria
0181
Tel: 012 342 8686
Fax: 012 342 8688
E-mail: [email protected]
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
ii
Executive Summary The Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) Chief Directorate: Aquaculture and
Economic Development aims to “develop a sustainable and competitive sector that will contribute
meaningfully to job creation, economic development, sustainable livelihoods, food security, rural
development and transformation” in South Africa. In line with this mandate, research and
development has been done on several freshwater and marine species which are important and
valuable to the South African aquaculture sector.
Rainbow trout is a popular and well-known species in the local and global aquaculture industry.
Although the trout value chain is fairly well developed in South Africa, improved market access,
production technologies and marketing of South African trout both locally and internationally is
required. Water and environmental conditions have a big impact on the location and success of
rainbow trout operations in South Africa.
Rainbow trout have been listed as a Category Two (2) species in the draft NEMBA regulations that
were published by the Department of Environmental Affairs in February 2018. As a category 2
species, trout would then require permits for aquaculture.
The rainbow trout industry is fast and dynamic, with rapid global growth being experienced in recent
years. Currently, Iran is the leading producer of trout, followed by Turkey and Chile. In Africa,
Lesotho is the primary trout producer, followed by South Africa. The South African trout industry
caters mostly for local and regional demand, as issue of non-compliance with EU and USA market
regulations prevent the export of locally produced trout.
The production guidelines provided in the table below gives a brief overview of a few important
factors that should be considered when looking at rainbow trout production in South Africa.
Rainbow Trout Production Guidelines
Optimal Temperature Range 12-16 °C
Maximum Temperature Range 2 -22 ° C
Water Conditions Optimal pH: 7-8
Optimal Oxygen: 95-100 % saturation
Ammonia: Less than 2mg/l NH₃-N
Nitrites: Less than 5mg/l NO₂-N
Optimal Salinity: Less than 10 ppt (Only during the hatchery period)
Average cost of fingerlings R 3-50 per 20-gram fingerling
Average Feed Cost R18-00 per kg
Feed Conversion Ratio (FCR) 1.2:1 or 1:1.
Stocking density RAS – 100 kg/m³ (only achievable with optimal flow-rates & oxygen)
Pond – 18 kg/m²
Cage – 25 kg/m3
Race/Flow – 40 kg/m3
Acceptable Monthly Mortality 1,2% per month
Accepted market Sizes 340 grams (plate sized fish)
1.2 kg fish
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
iii
The generic economic model for rainbow trout was developed through inputs from technical
experts, industry stakeholders and peer-review workshops. In addition to the key assumptions
mentioned above, several other production and system related assumptions were incorporated into
the model. An example of the results produced by the generic economic model is illustrated in the
table below.
Table 1-1: Example: Rainbow Trout Production in a RAS
Production and Financial Assumptions
Province Western Cape
System RAS
Minimum profitable tonnage/annum 82 tons
Selected selling weight 1243 grams
Applicant details Start-up farmer with no existing land, no infrastructure, or
facilities
Education level Formal Education (certificate, diploma, degree)
Finance option Debt/Equity (20%)
Interest rate 8.25%
Generic Economic Model Results
Total Capital Expenditure R 3 930 520.80
Working Capital R 1 145 498.00
Infrastructure expenditure R 2 785 022.80
Profitability Index (PI) 1.05
Internal Rate of Return (IRR) 8%
Net Present Value (NPV) over 10 years R 4 108 733.97
Number of employees (Year 1) 4
Based on the table above, RAS is profitable for rainbow trout production when producing a
minimum of 82 tonnes of trout per annum and selling the fish at the average price of R 59/kilogram.
This specific venture has a positive PI of 1.05 and an IRR of 8%. This RAS system requires an
estimated R 2 785 022 for infrastructure expenditure, and a working capital amount of R 1 145 498
which brings the total capital expenditure to R 3 930 520.
From the generic economic model, it was concluded that cage culture, flow-through systems, and
pond culture are the most profitable production systems for rainbow trout production in South
Africa. Key provinces identified for rainbow trout production from an economic perspective include
KwaZulu Natal, Eastern Cape, and the Western Cape, while the least profitable province for rainbow
trout production was the Northern Cape. It is essential to note that only certain regions in South
Africa offer the cool climatic conditions required for Rainbow trout production. While water
temperature management and cooling and/or heating can be used, this has a major impact on
production costs and the profitability of an operation.
Disclaimer: Production information and assumptions in this report may be subject to change over time as
certain production variables can be expected to fluctuate. Technical assumptions were utilised from various
industry experts and stakeholders. Due to the sensitive nature of information shared by stakeholders,
personal details of stakeholders will not be included in the report. Stakeholders will be referenced as
“Personal Communication” in the document, and reference list.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
iv
Table of Contents 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 7
1.1. Project Background ................................................................................................................. 7
1.2. Purpose of the feasibility study .............................................................................................. 7
1.3. Feasibility Study Outline ......................................................................................................... 8
2. Rainbow Trout ................................................................................................................................. 9
2.1. Species background ................................................................................................................ 9
2.2. Biological characteristics of Rainbow Trout .......................................................................... 10
2.3. Physical requirements of Rainbow Trout .............................................................................. 12
3. Potential Culture Systems for Rainbow Trout .............................................................................. 18
3.1. Recirculating Aquaculture Systems ....................................................................................... 18
3.2. Aquaponics Systems ............................................................................................................. 19
3.3. Flow Through Systems .......................................................................................................... 21
3.4. Raceway Systems .................................................................................................................. 22
3.5. Pond Culture Systems ........................................................................................................... 23
3.6. Cage Culture .......................................................................................................................... 24
3.7. Production System Summary ................................................................................................ 26
4. Geographical distribution of Rainbow Trout in South Africa ........................................................ 28
4.1. Suitability Assessment .......................................................................................................... 28
4.2. Key Location and Site Requirements .................................................................................... 29
4.3. Key requirements for Profitability ........................................................................................ 29
5. Rainbow Trout Market assessment .............................................................................................. 30
5.1. Production and Consumption ............................................................................................... 30
5.2. Marketing channels............................................................................................................... 34
5.3. Rainbow Trout Market requirements ................................................................................... 36
5.4. Barriers to entry and limitations of the market .................................................................... 37
6. SWOT analysis and Mitigation measures ...................................................................................... 39
6.1. SWOT Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 39
6.2. Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................................. 40
7. Rainbow Trout Technical Assessment .......................................................................................... 42
8. Rainbow Trout Financial Analysis ................................................................................................. 44
8.1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 44
8.2. Key Economic Model Assumptions ....................................................................................... 44
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
v
8.3. Rainbow Trout Production Financial Overview .................................................................... 46
8.4. Financial Analysis Summary .................................................................................................. 53
8.5. Rainbow Trout Cost Benefit Analysis .................................................................................... 54
8.6. Rainbow Trout Best Case Scenario ....................................................................................... 55
9. Conclusion and Recommendations............................................................................................... 58
9.1. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 58
9.2. Recommendations ................................................................................................................ 59
10. References ................................................................................................................................ 60
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
6
Table of Figures Figure 2-1: Production Life Cycle of Rainbow Trout ............................................................................. 11
Figure 2-2: Impacts of feeding rate increase on Rainbow Trout .......................................................... 14
Figure 2-3: Average Dissolved Oxygen requirements for salmonids .................................................... 16
Figure 4-1: Suitable areas for trout in South Africa .............................................................................. 28
Figure 5-1: Global Trout Production (1950 - 2015) ............................................................................... 30
Figure 5-2: Top 20 global producers of Rainbow Trout (2015) ............................................................. 30
Figure 5-3: Top Five global producers of Rainbow Trout 2000- 2015 .................................................. 31
Figure 5-4: Production of trout in Africa (2000-2015) .......................................................................... 32
Figure 5-5: Major Trout Importers (2013) ............................................................................................ 33
Figure 5-6: Global Key trout producer’s countries and their main trade routes .................................. 34
Figure 5-7: Russian import structure by country between 2013 and 2016 .......................................... 35
Figure 5-8: South Africa and Lesotho import and export trade routes (2015) ..................................... 36
Figure 8-1: Generic Economic Model Overview ................................................................................... 44
List of Tables Table 1-1: Example: Rainbow Trout Production in a RAS ...................................................................... iii
Table 2-1: Commercial Trout Feed Overview ....................................................................................... 13
Table 2-2: Trout Feeding Rates ............................................................................................................. 13
Table 3-1: Trout Production Systems Summary ................................................................................... 26
Table 5-1: Industry performances of selected key producers (2000-2015) ......................................... 31
Table 5-2: Domestic consumption of trout (2015) ............................................................................... 33
Table 6-1: Rainbow Trout Swot Analysis ............................................................................................... 39
Table 6-2: Rainbow Trout Mitigation Measures ................................................................................... 40
Table 7-1: Rainbow Trout Technical Assessment ................................................................................. 42
Table 8-1: Rainbow Trout Model Assumptions .................................................................................... 44
Table 8-2: Trout Financial and Production Assumptions ...................................................................... 46
Table 8-3: Capital Costs for a RAS ......................................................................................................... 46
Table 8-4: Operational Expenditure for a RAS (Year 1) ......................................................................... 47
Table 8-5: RAS Financial Overview ........................................................................................................ 47
Table 8-6: Capital Costs for Pond culture ............................................................................................. 48
Table 8-7: Operational Expenditure for Pond culture (Year 1) ............................................................. 48
Table 8-8: Pond Culture Financial Overview ......................................................................................... 49
Table 8-9: Capital Expenditure for Cage Culture .................................................................................. 49
Table 8-10: Operational Expenditure for Cage culture (Year 1) ........................................................... 50
Table 8-11: Cage Culture Financial Overview ....................................................................................... 50
Table 8-12: Capital Costs for a Flow-through System ........................................................................... 51
Table 8-13: Operational Expenditure for a Flow-through (Year 1) ....................................................... 51
Table 8-14: Flow-through Financial Overview ...................................................................................... 51
Table 8-15: Capital Costs for a Raceway System .................................................................................. 52
Table 8-16 :Operational Expenditure for a Raceway (Year 1)............................................................... 52
Table 8-17: Summary: Production Systems Financial Overview ........................................................... 53
Table 8-18: Rainbow Trout Cost Benefit Analysis ................................................................................. 54
Table 8-19: Best Case Scenario Summary ............................................................................................. 55
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
7
1. Introduction
1.1. Project Background
In South Africa, aquaculture has been identified as a key economic sector and employment cluster.
Various policies, programmes and initiatives have been developed and implemented to assist with
the development of the aquaculture sector. Some of the key initiatives include the National
Aquaculture Strategic Framework (NASF), the Aquaculture Development and Enhancement
Programme (ADEP), and Operation Phakisa to name a few. The primary goal of the various policies,
programmes and initiatives is to accelerate the growth of the aquaculture industry, enabling it to
play a critical role in supplying fish products both locally and internationally, improving job creation,
and contributing to the national economy, among other aspects. The sector has also been identified
as a key industry that can impact the development and reindustrialisation of rural communities and
townships in South Africa.
Aquaculture is one of the fastest growing food sectors in the world; however the South African
aquaculture sector remains small and underdeveloped despite the high-growth potential offered by
the sector. In recent years, South Africa has seen improved access to aquaculture technology,
increasing amounts of research and development, as well as government support from several key
government departments. Coupled with the increasing support and interest in the South African
aquaculture industry, there is potential to overcome some key challenges faced in the industry
which hinders its development. These challenges include access to suitable production areas,
production challenges, market access, and the need for value chain development.
Through continued research and development, value chain development, education and skills
development, and continued support, the South African aquaculture industry shows good growth
potential that will prove to be valuable from an economic and social aspect.
This report focuses specifically on rainbow trout production in South Africa, and considers the
following potential production systems:
I. Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS),
II. Pond culture,
III. Cage culture,
IV. Flow-through systems, and
V. Raceways.
1.2. Purpose of the feasibility study
This feasibility study will be focusing specifically on rainbow trout production and markets in South
Africa. The study will cover the following aspects:
I. Background on rainbow trout,
II. Geographical distribution of trout in South Africa,
III. Detailed global, regional, and local market assessment,
IV. Potential barriers to entry,
V. SWOT Analysis and Mitigation measures for trout production in South Africa,
VI. Technical Assessment, and
VII. Financial analysis
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
8
In addition to the feasibility study conducted, a generic economic model was developed for rainbow
trout. The generic economic model is aimed at assisting DAFF, industry stakeholders, role-players,
and new entrants to the trout industry to determine the financial viability of trout projects in South
Africa.
1.3. Feasibility Study Outline
The following feasibility study is made up of nine (9) sections, each of which is briefly elaborated on
below to provide an overview of the report.
Section 1 provides a project background as well as the main aspects that covered within the
feasibility study.
Section 2 focuses on providing a species background, and the key biological and physical
characteristics of rainbow trout.
Section 3 provides a detailed explanation of the potential production systems that can be
used for rainbow trout in South Africa. These production systems are included in the generic
economic model to determine the financial viability of each system.
Section 4 looks at the geographical distribution of rainbow trout in South Africa, provides a
high-level suitability assessment, and identifies the key requirements for profitability.
Section 5 provides a detailed global, regional, and local market analysis for rainbow trout.
Marketing, pricing, demand and supply, and potential barriers to entry are key factors that
need to be considered before implementing an aquaculture project.
Section 6 includes a SWOT Analysis that provides a high-level overview of the rainbow trout
industry in South Africa. The section also identifies mitigation measures to address key
weaknesses and threats.
Section 7 includes a technical assessment that provides a brief overview of key production
assumptions and guidelines used for rainbow trout production. These assumptions were
used in the development of the generic economic model.
Section 8 provides a financial analysis for the potential production systems based on the
results obtained from the generic economic model. A high-level cost-benefit analysis is
discussed to compare the feasibility of the potential production systems; and a best-case
scenario is provided to highlight the minimum viable tonnage, recommended selling price
and investment potential offered by the various production systems in the nine provinces.
Section 9 provides the conclusion on the feasibility study as well as recommendations for
the growth and development of the rainbow trout industry in South Africa.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
9
2. Rainbow Trout
2.1. Species background
Salmonids, including rainbow trout are some of
the earliest fish introduced and spread in
temperature regions globally. Rainbow trout
(Oncorhynchus mykiss) is native to the cold-
water rivers and lakes of the Pacific coasts of
North America (ranging from Alaska to Mexico)
and Asia. In South Africa, salmonids were introduced in the late 1800’s and are thought to have been
introduced to more than 75% of major river catchments across the country (DEA, 2014). In addition
to the rainbow trout, other trout species that can be found include brown trout (Salmo trutta), and
golden trout, however, only rainbow trout are used for commercial aquaculture.
Rainbow trout are renowned for their attractive and colourful patterned skin, and their remarkable
ability to swim swiftly upstream. Whilst the physical appearance of rainbow trout can vary greatly,
depending on the habitat, food, age, sex, and spawning conditions (Woynarovich, et al.,
2011).Rainbow trout are generally blue-green or yellow-green in colour, with a pink streak along
their sides. The species are torpedo-shaped with short heads, a white underbelly, elongated and
moderately compressed bodies, and have small black spots on their back and fins. Rainbow trout
lack teeth at the base of the tongue, have a high food conversion ratio and grow quickly, although it
may take up to 18 months to reach full maturity. These fish are also more tolerant of a wide range of
environmental and production conditions compared to other trout species.
Although, the rainbow trout is not indigenous to South Africa, it is the most well-established
aquaculture species in the country (DAFF & WRC, 2010). It is very popular as a fishing species as well
as a high-value food fish. Since its introduction, rainbow trout have become established in many of
South Africa’s rivers and dams. The successful culture of trout requires culture systems with plenty
of clean, oxygen-rich water. They cannot be cultured in stagnant ponds or those with a slow water
exchange rate (DAFF & WRC, 2010).
Rainbow trout generally have several attributes which make them attractive as a culture species.
These attributes include:
I. They are popular recreational angling and table fish (dual-purpose),
II. They are fast-growing and can be cultured at high densities,
III. They can easily adapt to a variety of aquatic environments, including aquaculture conditions,
IV. The fish is a well-established aquaculture species, with established markets (the fish attracts
high prices at the market), and
V. They can be propagated artificially
However, some of the disadvantages of rainbow trout as an aquaculture species include:
I. They have little to no tolerance for low oxygen or high temperatures,
II. Rainbow trout are regarded as alien invasive species by conservation agencies.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
10
2.2. Biological characteristics of Rainbow Trout
The rainbow trout is a hardy fish that is fairly fast growing, and tolerant of a wide range of
environments. They can occupy many different habitats, ranging from anadromous, fast-flowing,
well-oxygenated rivers and streams, to permanently inhabiting lakes. The anadromous strain (known
as steelhead) is known for its rapid growth, achieving 7-10 kg within three years, whereas the
freshwater strain can only attain 4 to 5 kg in the same time span.
The rainbow trout require cool temperatures, with an optimal range of 12-16˚C; however, spawning
and growth occurs at a narrower temperature range of between 9-14 °C (FAO, 2017; DAFF & WRC,
2010). It has been noted that temperatures higher than 21°C could result in the trout not feeding,
increased risk of diseases, lower dissolved oxygen content and can prove to be lethal (Salie, et al.,
2008).
Sexual maturity of rainbow trout largely depends on their growth rate. Females usually reach
maturity at the age of two to four years, and males between one to three years. In terms of
reproduction, the female rainbow trout spawns mainly in river channels and their tributaries, as well
as inlet or outlet streams of lakes (NRCS & WHC, 2000). Using her tail, the female digs a depression
in the gravel, called a redd. She then deposits a portion of her eggs into the redd, as an attending
male fertilizes them. The fertilized eggs are covered by gravel as the female excavates yet another
redd just upstream. (NRCS & WHC, 2000).
Monoculture is the most common practice in rainbow trout culture, and intensive systems are
considered necessary in most situations to make the operation economically attractive. Females can
produce up to 2 000 eggs/kilogram of body weight, with their eggs being relatively large in diameter
(3-7 mm) (FAO, 2017). Most fish only spawn once, in spring, although selective breeding and
photoperiod adjustment has developed hatchery strains that can mature earlier and spawn all year
round. Superior characteristic selection is also achieved by cross breeding, increasing growth rates,
resistance to disease, prolificacy, as well as improving meat quality and taste. Genetic manipulation
of the embryo sex chromosomes has also been successfully carried out to produce sterile, triploid
females. This helps to avoid the 'hook-like' jaw that does not appeal to the customer and ensures
that introduced/escaped fish are not able to breed. It is important to note that the rainbow trout
does not spawn naturally in culture systems; thus, juveniles are usually obtained either through
artificial spawning in a hatchery or by collecting eggs from wild stocks, (FAO, 2017). Artificial
spawning however is a demanding task that requires careful planning and considerable equipment
to hatch the eggs and rear the fry successfully.
The figure below describes the production life cycle of rainbow trout, from fertilisation, through to
production, and the selection of trout broodstock.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
11
Figure 2-1: Production Life Cycle of Rainbow Trout
Source: (FAO, 2017)
The rainbow trout industry is known to have been negatively impacted by disease outbreaks, which
had a major impact on production in countries such as Chile in recent years. According to the risk
assessment conducted for rainbow trout in South Africa, the trout are considered to be a vector for
the whirling disease myxosporean parasite, which has affected the native rainbow trout populations
in North America; however, it was not expected that this disease would have a major impact in
South Africa’s native fish populations (DEA, 2014).
According to Salie, et al. (2008), although no major outbreaks of diseases have been reported by
South African trout farms, caution should be exercised, specifically in intensive aquaculture systems,
as disease causing pathogens are omnipresent in the water environment, and can be affected by
stocking density, water conditions, temperature, and general farm management practices. Apart
from the factors that can cause the diseases mentioned stress of the fish, specifically in aquaculture
systems, can increase the risk of disease as well as impact the fish’s ability to adapt to aquaculture
production conditions. When considering diseases and the trout, it should be viewed as a dynamic
equilibrium which is influenced by three main factors, namely the fish (host), the pathogen (disease
causing agent) and the environment. This equilibrium is highly sensitive and can be influenced or
altered by any action or change made by the producer, or changes that occur within the
environment (such as temperature, water quality, etc.), which will increase the risk of a disease
outbreak (Salie, et al., 2008). Generally, RAS is seen as a safer production from a disease point of
view; however, as the water quality needs to be constantly controlled, it can be more prone to
environmental diseases as opposed to other production systems. Regardless of the system being
used, special care and disease management measures are required to ensure disease outbreaks do
not become an issue (Noble, 2004).
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
12
Diseases found in trout can either be viral or bacterial, depending on the type of pathogen causing
the problem. Poor health or disease outbreak in the fish can be noticed by these common signs:
Loss of appetite,
Fish are lethargic (slow swimming/hanging in water),
Abnormal behaviour (flashing, jumping etc.),
Changes in appearance (colour changes, darker fish, excess mucus),
Marks or lesions on the body or fins (ulcers, fin rot etc.), and
Increased or occurring mortality (Salie, et al., 2008).
2.3. Physical requirements of Rainbow Trout
Throughout its life cycle, rainbow trout typically have varying feed, temperature and water
conditions that need to be considered to ensure the optimal growth and health of the fish. To this
extent, the following aspects are important considerations when producing rainbow trout, for both
producers and trout feed manufacturers.
2.3.1. Feeding
Rainbow trout, as a carnivorous predator, has a gastrointestinal tract adapted to digest animal and
vegetable protein to a small degree. In the wild or natural waters, rainbow trout feed on natural
diets such as aquatic and terrestrial insects, molluscs, crustaceans, fish eggs, crayfish, and other
small fish. These natural diets are rich in pigments and are responsible for the pigmentation on the
flesh of the fish. However, the colour pigmentation can be induced in cultured systems, through the
addition of synthetic pigments in the fish feed. In cultured systems, feed is one of the main
production costs for producers thus the feed quality and feeding strategy are of the utmost
importance. The feed provides the fish with the energy and nutrients required for good growth and
health. The necessary composition of the feed varies throughout the life cycle of the fish. As such,
the choice of a specific feed type depends on the farming conditions, type of operation as well as the
management
The profitability of an aquaculture operation is dependent on good feed management, optimal feed
utilisation, and minimal feed wastage. To ensure optimal feed management is practiced, some key
considerations include, but are not limited to the following:
Feed should be correctly stored in a cool, dry, and well-ventilated facility,
Correct grain size and feed type must be selected according to the growth phase of the fish,
Prescribed feeding tables from feed manufacturers should be followed, however they can be
slightly adapted should the need arise,
Correct feeding procedures must be implemented and maintained. This includes feeding
time of day, tempo of feeding, frequency of feeding and feed distribution patterns, and
Fish behaviour should be observed before, during and after feeding. Adjustments to the
feeding programme can be done according to behaviour (Salie, et al., 2008).
The main components in the feed are protein, fat, carbohydrates, vitamins, and minerals. The
quality, composition, and the quantitative ratio between the individual components determine the
fish’s performance and the feed utilisation. A deficiency in any of the essential nutrients can limit the
growth of the fish and could result in health-related issues that negatively affect the production of
trout. Feed pellets used for feeding rainbow trout are manufactured by extrusion. The mixture is
exposed to extreme pressure and high temperatures for a short time. This treacly mass is then
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
13
pressed through the extruder nozzles to create expanded and porous pellets that are able to absorb
relatively high amounts of oil (> 30% oil content). The pelletised fish feed is primarily used for
rainbow trout production in South Africa.
An example of trout feed ingredients are provided in Table 2-1 below. These amounts are specific to
one brand of commercial trout feed and may differ between feed manufacturers.
Table 2-1: Commercial Trout Feed Overview
Nutrient Units
Trout Fry (No.0
powder and 1
crumble)
Starter 2 mm
Pellet (No.2 and
3 crumble &
mini pellet)
Trout Grower 3
mm Pellet
Trout Finisher
4,5- and 8-mm
Pellet
Digestible Energy MJ/kg 16 16 16 16
Crude Protein g/kg 500 480 450 407
Arginine g/kg 29,9 29,0 27,1 24,2
Histidine g/kg 11,5 10,5 9,8 9,3
Isoleucine g/kg 20,7 20,3 18,9 17,0
Lysine g/kg 31,6 30,0 28,1 24,7
Methionine g/kg 13,3 12,4 11,5 10,2
T.S.A.A. g/kg 19,4 19,5 18,3 16,6
Threonine g/kg 19,4 18,9 17,6 15,8
Tryptophan g/kg 4,8 4,8 4,5 4,0
Valine g/kg 24,8 24,4 22,9 20,6
Fat g/kg 140 140 140 140
Linoleic Acid g/kg 8 9 11 12
ADF g/kg 18 23 27 32
Carbohydrate g/kg 142 171 184 190
Fibre g/kg 22 23 24 24
NDF g/kg 35 44 56 68
Ash g/kg 89 70 67 56
Avl Phosphorus g/kg 10 8 7 6
Calcium g/kg 22 17 16 13
Chloride g/kg 7 5 4 4
Magnesium g/kg 1 1 1 1
Potassium g/kg 6 7 7 7
Sodium g/kg 5 3 3 3
Sulphur g/kg 4 4 4 4
Total Phosphorus g/kg 15 12 11 9
(Urban-Econ, 2018)
The diets listed above are efficiently converted by the fish, often at food conversion ratios of around
1:0 to 1.2. Table 2-2 below indicates potential feeding rates based on a feeding rate (as a
percentage) of the fish body weight.
Table 2-2: Trout Feeding Rates
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
14
fish size (grams) 0 12 20 68 130 182 297 566 685 943 1230
feeding rate % of body weight
7 6,32 4,8 3,51 2,14 2,33 1,91 1,78 1,69 2,1 1,62
Adapted from (Davidson, et al., 2014)
Based on the assumptions above, the following average feeding rates were applied to the generic
economic model; however, they can be amended to accommodate specific temperature ranges or
grow-out conditions:
Month 1 – 4,8 % of fish mass/day,
Month 2 – 3,51% of fish mass/day,
Month 3 + - 2,12 % of fish mass/day, and
Month 5 + - 1,72 % of fish mass/day.
Although hand feeding is suitable for small fish-eating fine food, mechanical, power driven feeders
are frequently used to feed specific amounts at set intervals depending on fish size, temperature,
and season. Demand feeders can be used for fish greater than 12 cm (FAO, 2017). In terms of feed
management, an increase in the feeding rates within an aquaculture system can have several
impacts on both the trout, as well as the production system. The Figure 2-2 below highlights the
impact that an increase in feeding rates can have on a group of rainbow trout.
Figure 2-2: Impacts of feeding rate increase on Rainbow Trout
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
15
Source: (Klontz, 1991)
An increase in feed (over feeding) or alternatively underfeeding will have a negative effect on
growth rates and feed conversion rates therefore, affecting the overall production of a trout
operation. As such, producers must ensure that they manage and implement feed programmes
cautiously in order to ensure maximum growth and production of fish.
2.3.2. Temperature
Temperature plays an important role in the production of rainbow trout. The optimal, acceptable,
and lethal ranges of water temperature also vary according to the development stages of the fish.
Generally, rainbow trout prefer cooler temperatures (12-18˚C) growing optimally at water
temperatures ranging between 8 and 20°C (Salie, et al., 2008; DAFF & WRC, 2010). Temperatures
higher than 21°C will cause the trout to stop feeding and will create other problems, such as
increased risk of diseases and oxygen problems (mainly caused by too many microscopic algae in the
water) (Salie, et al., 2008). Special care must be taken to prevent mortalities as well as the on-set of
algae taints. Algae taints are caused by an increase in blue-green algae numbers as a result of higher
temperatures and nutrient levels. The algae release chemical compounds that are absorbed by fish
which can give the fish an 'off flavour' due to poor water quality and cyanobacteria.
Temperature has a major impact on the production of rainbow trout, as can be seen in the following
environmental changes for a 100-gram trout when the water temperature is increased from 9˚C to
15˚C.
a. Fish Associated Changes
67.5% increase in metabolic rates (oxygen demand)
97.8% increase in daily length gain potential
66.7% increase in daily weight gain potential
98.6% increase in ammonia generation potential
33.1 % decrease in oxygen carrying capacity
b. Water Associated Changes
12.8% decrease in oxygen concentration
58.8% increase in environmental unionized ammonia
67.5% decrease in dissolved oxygen (Klontz, 1991).
2.3.3. Oxygen levels
As with any fish, rainbow trout are dependent on dissolved oxygen (DO) to survive. The amount of
DO is dependent on temperature and can be affected by water quality, amount of sediment in the
water, the amount of oxygen taken out of the system through respiration or decaying organisms and
the amount of oxygen that is replaced in a system by stream flow and aeration. The higher the water
temperature, the lower the amount of dissolved oxygen available in the water, thus highlighting the
importance of regulating water temperature and oxygen levels for rainbow trout. According to Salie,
et al, (2008) during the incubation of eggs and the first development stages of fry, the acceptable
range for dissolved oxygen content of rearing water ranges between 5 and 6 mg/l1. For older age
groups, the acceptable oxygen content of water is between 4–5 mg/l (Salie, et al., 2008;
1 Milligrams of oxygen per litre of water
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
16
Woynarovich, et al., 2011). It is important to know that the oxygen consumption and demand of the
trout increases considerably during and after feeding (for a period of up to six (6) hours).
According to Muradian (2016), DO levels and metabolic rates depend on the water temperature. As
temperature increases, the saturation level of DO in the water decreases, however, the DO
requirements for the trout increase, which can be detrimental to the fish. Figure 2-3 below
illustrates that for trout eggs, DO levels greater than 11 mg/L are optimal, with DO levels above 9
mg/L considered sub-optimal but no stressful for the embryos. Abnormalities may occur when DO
levels fall below 7 mg/L and sustained DO levels below 5mg/L can be lethal.
From the image it is evident that
juvenile and adult trout have a higher
tolerance for lower DO levels than
eggs and sac-fry. Optimal and sub-
optimal levels occur at a minimum of
4 mg/L in cooler temperatures
(below 15˚C) while in warmer
temperatures (above 15˚C) optimal
and sub-optimal levels increase to a
minimum of 6 mg/L. In cooler
temperatures, mortality will occur
when the DO level is less than 3
mg/L, while in warmer conditions, a
lethal DO level is anything below 5
mg/L, with the fish being stressed
when DO levels fall between 5 – 6
mg/L.
Based on the data presented above, it is evident that oxygen and water
temperature must be regularly monitored and controlled. It is recommended that optimal oxygen
saturation of 95% to 100% is maintained at the optimal temperature range of 12 -16˚C to ensure
dissolved oxygen levels are kept at optimal levels.
2.3.4. pH Requirement
The pH is used to determine the level of acidity or alkalinity within a given culture system. A neutral
or slightly alkaline pH (between 7 and 8) is best for rainbow trout, (National Bank for Agriculture and
Rural Development, 2016). As such, the tolerable minimum and maximum pH values for rainbow
trout are between 5 and 9, respectively (NABARD, n.d.; Salie, et al., 2008). It should however be
noted that the optimal and acceptable ranges of pH for developing embryos and fry differ slightly,
varying between 6.5 and 8 (Woynarovich, et al., 2011). According to Molony (2001), a pH exceeding
9 will increase mortality rates of the trout, specifically at the egg or fry development stages.
The most important factor that increases pH levels in open culture systems is the growth of small
algae. The excessive abundance of these algae can increase the pH level to levels higher than 9
during the daytime (especially in small open culture systems), thereby putting the fish under stress.
This is due to the removal of carbon dioxide during the photosynthesis process. Most water quality
Figure 2-3: Average Dissolved Oxygen requirements for salmonids
(Muradian, 2016)
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
17
problems are often caused by oxygen depletion, high ammonia levels or high pH levels, and are very
closely linked to the abundance of microscopic algae; the occurrence of which depends on the
amount of nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus) in the water. The main source of these nutrients is
through the source water (inflow), along with sediments during heavy rainfall events (runoff), or
through fish feed during the production cycle.
2.3.5. Ammonia Requirement
Ammonia is an inorganic component of nitrogen in water. Unless there is a direct inflow of ammonia
or the water is in very anoxic conditions (i.e. not enough oxygen), most nitrogen in the water will be
present as nitrate, which is not harmful to fish. Ammonia occurs in a toxic and non-toxic form; the
toxic form is usually less than 10% of the overall ammonia amount but can increase with high pH and
temperature levels. Ammonia levels will mostly not create problems in open culture systems unless
the system is very shallow (5 meters or less).
2.3.6. Water and Turbidity Requirement
Clear, pollutant and chemical free water conditions are required for rainbow trout production. The
turbidity should not be more than 25 cm of Secchi disc transparency. When selecting a production
site, it is important to check the quality and quantity (volume) of available water, and the suitability
of the site for rainbow trout production. To ensure the replacement of used water within a given
culture system, a continuous supply of fresh, clean, and oxygen-rich water is essential.
Water supply is expressed by the flow rate, which is expressed either in litres per second (litre/s) or
litres per minute (litres/min). Usually, about 10 litres/second (600 litres/min) of water should be
available to produce one ton of rainbow trout (Woynarovich, et al., 2011). At low water
temperatures, the quantity of water supplied may be less, but at higher water temperatures it
should be more. The availability (quantity) of water may change considerably according to the
seasons, especially in the case of surface waters and springs. In dry seasons, the water supply may
drastically reduce, whilst heavy rains often cause floods and sudden increases in groundwater levels.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
18
3. Potential Culture Systems for Rainbow Trout The potential production systems identified are considered in the generic economic model to
determine the financial feasibility of each system from an economic perspective. Each production
system is unique in terms of the infrastructure requirements and operational costs which can be
seen in the generic economic model. The potential culture systems that could be used to culture
rainbow trout in South Africa include the following:
3.1. Recirculating Aquaculture Systems2
The recirculating aquaculture system (RAS) offers a dual
objective of sustainable aquaculture (i.e. to produce food
while sustaining natural resources) as a result of the
minimum impact that the system has on its surrounding
environment as well as the broader eco-system. The RAS
is sometimes referred to as indoor or urban aquaculture,
reflecting its independency of surface water to produce fish. Water recirculating methods of
aquaculture production is ideally suitable for areas with scarce water resources.
The RAS can be used for rainbow trout production in a variety of ways, ranging from fry rearing up to
portion size fish as well as for larger trout. Some fry producers use recirculation technology to
improve the production efficiency. The benefits of using this technology include more regulated
rearing temperatures as well as securing high and constant water quality, which can improve growth
potential and health of the fish. The capital investment for farm construction is normally much
higher for RAS, compared to that of conventional aquaculture systems. As such, the system should
be designed and constructed in a way that it has lower running costs, therefore compensating for
the initial capital investment.
Recirculating systems are generally not suitable for rearing cold-water species such as rainbow trout,
as these species do not thrive in warm, recycled waters (Helfrich & Libey, 2013). The stocking density
of rainbow trout in a RAS depends more on the volume of water supply, temperature, and oxygen
concentration in water than on the actual size of the rearing tanks. Although fast current water is
required for rainbow trout production, very fast running water is also not desirable. This is because
fish might use energy more for swimming instead of growing if the current is too fast. On the other
hand, slow currents tend to result in the accumulation of waste products. Therefore, water flow in a
RAS must be higher in the summer months (when water temperature is higher and dissolved oxygen
lower) than in winter. Furthermore, it is recommended that water currents be sufficient to provide
at least one complete exchange of water every one or two hours (Joshi & Westlund Lofvall, 1996).
RAS have limited water exchange (typically up to 10% per day) and reuse the culture water.
Mechanical and biological water treatment is used to maintain water quality.
Advantages of using the recirculating aquaculture systems
I. RAS generally requires less area and water than conventional aquaculture systems,
II. It allows for higher stocking densities and provides greater control over the culture
environment,
2 It should be noted that even though rainbow trout grows well in RAS, fast-flow rates of water would be
required.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
19
III. The system allows for intensive aquaculture production to be undertaken on a smaller
footprint,
IV. The system can be located in areas that do not have sufficient water resources for
conventional aquaculture systems,
V. RAS provides opportunities to reduce water usage, improve waste management and
increase nutrient recycling,
VI. RAS allows for better hygiene, disease management, biological pollution control and
reduction of the visual impact of the farm,
VII. The application of RAS technology enables the production of rainbow trout in close
proximity to markets, and
VIII. Rainbow trout cultured in RAS would unlikely be able to escape into natural waterways
therefore reducing its threat as an invasive species.
Disadvantages of using the recirculating aquaculture systems
I. The operation of these systems requires a high level of skills and expertise,
II. There are many different bio-filtration systems involved in operating the system. A bio-filter
must be suited to trout production and water conditions,
III. Large capital investments are required for building and starting up facilities,
IV. High operational expenses (electricity, labour, etc.) are a key disadvantage of a RAS,
V. Managing disease outbreaks may pose specific challenges in RAS, in which a healthy
microbial community contributes to water purification and water quality, and
VI. Minerals, drug residues, hazardous feed compounds and metabolites may accumulate in the
system and affect the health, quality, and safety of the fish.
3.2. Aquaponics Systems3
The aquaponics system combines the culture of fish
and plants in a closed recirculating system. Waste
nutrients in the aquaculture effluent are used to
produce plant crops (Rakocy, et al., 2004).These
systems require very little water and land for the
intensive production of trout, hydroponic vegetables,
and other crops such as culinary herbs, medicinal herbs
and cut flowers.
In the aquaponics system, the aquaculture effluent
typically supplies most of the required plant nutrients in adequate amounts, with only little
supplementation required, (Rakocy, et al., 2004). As the aquaculture effluent flows through the
hydroponic component of the recirculating system, fish waste metabolites are removed by
nitrification and direct uptake by the plants, thereby treating the water, which flows back to the fish-
rearing component for reuse. Continuous generation of nutrients from fish waste prevents nutrient
depletion while uptake of nutrients by the plants prevents nutrient accumulation, extends water
use, and reduces discharge to the environment. Culture water can also be used continuously for
several years under the aquaponics system.
3 Note that rainbow trout aquaculture under the aquaponic system has barely been tested in South Africa. Therefore, there
are no known literature on the species-system combination.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
20
The technology associated with aquaponics is fairly complex. It requires the ability to simultaneously
manage the production and marketing of two different agricultural products. Aquaponic systems can
be highly successful, but they require careful management as well as special considerations. The
main factors to take into account when deciding where to place an aquaponics unit are: the stability
of the ground; access to sunlight and shading (most of the common plants for aquaponics grow well
in full sun conditions, however, extreme environmental conditions can stress plants and destroy
structures); exposure to wind and rain (strong and prevailing wind and rain fall can cause damages);
availability of utilities; and availability of a greenhouse or shading structure (FAO, 2014). The
essential components of an aquaponics system include the following:
I. The fish tank,
II. The mechanical and biological filter,
III. The plant growing units (media beds, nutrient film technique (NFT) pipes or deep-water
culture (DWC) canals),
IV. Water/air pumps,
V. Sump tank, and
VI. Water testing kits.
Advantages of using the aquaponics system
I. Ease of harvest,
II. Multiple income streams. Aquaponics utilise the nutrient rich water from aquaculture, that
would otherwise have been a waste product or needed to be filtered in a costly manner, to
produce other valuable plants,
III. Significant reduction in the usage of water. Aquaponics use a fraction of the water that
conventional aquaculture production systems use, because no water is wasted or consumed
by weeds,
IV. Significantly less land is required to grow the same crops as with traditional soil methods. In
aquaponics, plant spacing can be very intensive, allowing for the growing of more plants
within a given space,
V. Growth of plants is significantly faster than in traditional methods using soil, and
VI. Reduced damage from pests and diseases. In aquaponics, no pesticides or herbicides are
used, making the end-product healthier and safer.
Disadvantages of using the aquaponic system
I. As trout require pristine water and high dissolved oxygen levels to thrive, they are not as
adaptable to this culture system as other freshwater fish species,
II. Close monitoring of pH levels is required,
III. Another possible disadvantage is that limited plant choices would be available, because
recirculating cold water may harm the plants or stunt their growth,
IV. Aquaponics can be expensive to setup, as the system requires pumps, tubing, and
tanks/beds,
V. The setup requires technical knowledge of aquaponics systems,
VI. Water needs to be constantly monitored to make sure the water quality is suitable for the
fish, and
VII. Aquaponics requires electricity to maintain and recycle water within the system.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
21
3.3. Flow Through Systems
Flow-through systems are the most commonly
used aquaculture production systems for the
culture of rainbow trout. Within a flow-through
system, grow-out tanks are continuously
refreshed with large quantities of new water,
usually gravity-fed from nearby streams or rivers.
The most essential features of flow-through
aquaculture systems are therefore the rapid
removal of wastes, the continuous replenishment
of the system with highly oxygenated water, and
the sloping topography.
Flow-through aquaculture systems require water exchange to maintain suitable water quality for fish
production and rely on water flow for the collection and removal of metabolic wastes. Water for
flow-through facilities is usually diverted from streams, springs, or artesian wells to flow through the
farm using gravity. Water pumped from wells or other sources is more expensive and are seldom
used. However, water diverted from springs or surface sources for flow-through aquaculture might
require an application for water rights as well as compliance with certain regulations. The discharge
of high-volume, dilute effluent from flow-through aquaculture facilities greatly limits the treatment
options available to producers from both technological and economic perspectives. Concrete
raceways are the most common in flow-through systems. Circular rearing tanks are also used in
flow-through systems, most commonly for brood stock production.
Advantages of using the flow through system
I. This aquaculture system can be operated with reduced levels of investment because the
transportation of oxygen and waste is done by the current of the water body,
II. The water current produced within a flow-through system is ideally suitable for rainbow
trout production, and
III. The fish grows in its natural habitat.
Disadvantages of using the flow through system
I. The success of operating a flow-through system depends on natural conditions and
environmental events. For example, a cold winter or a hot summer can negatively affect
production,
II. South Africa is a water scarce country, thus the opportunity for single use, flow-through
systems are limited,
III. The system can be easily polluted or contaminated. For example, water run-off from nearby
farms where pesticides have been used, can easily pollute the water bodies,
IV. The diluted waste from the system can also have an inadvertent influence on the
downstream habitat,
V. The system is high-tech driven, thus requires a lot of energy making it less cost effective.
VI. The discharge of effluent water may require a permit, with required periodic testing and
oversight.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
22
3.4. Raceway Systems Raceways for fish culture are series of tanks (rearing
units) which are relatively shallow and continuously
supplied with high-water flow (usually along the
long axis), to sustain aquatic life. A typical raceway
culture system consists of a long and narrow canal
of concrete with a water inlet and outlet to maintain
a continuous flow of fresh water. With fresh water
continuously flowing through the canal, the water
quality is always high, and fish can be cultured at
high densities. Furthermore, in an ideal raceway system, the water flow is at an almost uniform
velocity across the tank cross section. However, friction losses at the tank-water and air-water
boundary layers cause water velocities to vary across the width and depth of the raceway. The
greatest water velocities are found at mid-depth, with slightly reduced velocities at the air-water
interface and greatly reduced velocities along the raceway bottom, towards the outlet.
Circular rearing units are more thoroughly mixed and provide relatively uniform environmental
conditions throughout the tank. The basic structure of raceway systems should be designed in a way
that none of the parts of culture waters are stagnant in the tanks, otherwise debris or faeces would
be accumulated in locations, thereby deteriorating water quality, or causing outbreaks of disease in
the system. As such, the primary factor to be considered in raceway construction is the available
water sources. When the available water sources are sufficient to support the entire system, the
raceways can be located across the water current. However, in cases where the water sources are a
limiting factor to the system operation, the raceways should be located along the water current. In
systems used for rainbow trout production, individual raceways are typically 2-3 metres wide, 12-30
metres long and 1-1.2 metres deep, (FAO, 2017). Raceways provide well-oxygenated water, an
important requirement for the production of rainbow trout. The water quality of the system can be
improved by increasing flow rates. However, the stock might be vulnerable to external water quality,
as the ambient water temperatures significantly influence growth rates.
The number of raceways in a series varies with the pH level, with the slope of the land also playing
an important role with regards to aeration (a 40 cm drop between each raceway is recommended).
To maintain good hygiene, water quality and control disease problems, and the parallel design
raceways is the most suitable, as any contamination flows through only a small part of the system.
Ground water can be used where pumping is not required, and aeration may be necessary in some
cases. Supersaturated well water with dissolved nitrogen can cause gas bubbles to form in the blood
of fish, preventing circulation, a condition known as gas-bubble disease. Alternatively, river water
can be used; however, temperature and flow fluctuations may alter production capacity.
Advantages of using the raceway system
I. Stocking densities for raceways are usually higher than for other culture systems. Optimal
stocking densities and quality feed can impact on growth and production volumes,
II. The labour costs associated with cleaning, grading, moving, and harvesting is significantly
lower in raceway systems,
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
23
III. Raceways offer a much greater ability to observe the fish. This can make feeding more
efficient,
IV. Disease problems are easier to detect and at earlier stages in raceway systems.
Furthermore, disease treatments in raceways are easier to apply and require fewer
chemicals than a similar number of fish in a pond (due to the higher density in the raceway),
V. Raceways also allow closer monitoring of growth and mortality, and therefore allow for
better inventory estimates compared to ponds, and
VI. Management inputs such as size grading are much more practicable in raceways compared
to other culture systems such as ponds; harvesting is also easier in this system.
Disadvantages of using the raceway system
I. The required hydrological conditions for the construction of raceways limit the number of
sites where a farm could be constructed,
II. The high stocking density could create stress and increase risk of disease outbreak,
III. Locating and securing a proper water supply can be challenging in South Africa,
IV. Commercial viability often requires that the water gravity flows through a series of raceways
before it is released. This adds a requirement for an elevation of the water source and
suitable topography for the gravity flow between raceways,
V. The release of large volumes of effluent with low retention times is another major limitation
of raceways,
VI. Raceway aquaculture is generally high-tech and high risk, as problems can develop rapidly if
the system fails, and
VII. The system requires high energy costs, specifically for pumping and maintaining water
conditions.
3.5. Pond Culture Systems Ponds are large but shallow earth structures, which are typically constructed for rearing fish. Earth
ponds are the traditional structures used for rainbow trout production, usage of which have become
less common due to the intensification of trout farming in recent years. The pond size used for
rainbow trout production varies depending on several factors such as the availability of water,
topography, soil type, production goals, etc. Most earth ponds on rainbow trout farms are lined with
membrane or paved with stone or concrete. The required quantities of water for 1 m3 of a
rectangular earth pond may vary between 0.7 and 1.4 litres/minutes where the exchange rate of
water is about one to two times per day (Woynarovich, et al., 2011). The usual densities for the
different age groups of rainbow trout in earth ponds are presented in Table below. With aeration of
the water, the quantities of fish produced (as indicated in the table below) can cautiously be
increased.
Table 3-1: Key Semi-Intensive Production Figures of Rainbow Trout in Earth Ponds
Quantity of fish
and water
Fry Fingerling Growing Fish Table Fish
2 g/fish 5 g/fish 25 g/fish 100 g/fish 250 g/fish 500 g/fish
From To From To From To
Weight of fish
(kg fish/m3)
Not recommended 3 6 3 8 5 8 5 8
Quantity of fish
(fish/m3)
Not recommended 120 240 30 80 20 32 10 16
Source: (Woynarovich, et al., 2011)
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
24
Earthen pond systems can be more challenge to maintain than tank systems, specifically when it
comes to weighing and grading of the trout, which takes place on a regular basis. The carrying
capacity of an earthen pond is a function of the ratio of surface area to water volume, inflow rate
and oxygen demand of the sediments, and it is best determined by measuring the dissolved oxygen
concentration of the pond and outflow waters and by maintaining good production records.
Advantages of using Pond systems for Rainbow Trout farming
I. Construction cost is relatively low (unless there are flood defence problems) when
compared to other culture systems,
II. Pond culture systems are not labour intensive as other production systems,
III. Little skill is required to manage the ponds, and
IV. Lower fish densities associated with earthen ponds may result in trout with less fin erosion
with a more colourful appearance which are in demand for recreational fishing and stocking
purposes.
Disadvantages of using Pond systems for Rainbow Trout farming
I. Rainbow trout production in ponds present a difficult challenge for waste (faecal and feed)
management,
II. The system is reliant on a well-managed feeding programme (typically pelletised feed),
III. Fish are stocked at a lower stocking density, which may reduce yield and profitability,
IV. Rainbow trout farming requires a constant supply of fresh, circulating, and high-quality flow
of water, which is not necessarily offered by ponds,
V. There is a higher risk of build-up of solid waste (leading to growth of bacteria and fungus) if
waste materials are not disposed regularly,
VI. Rainbow trout cultured in ponds are more difficult to manage and harvest, and
VII. Rainbow trout cultured in pond systems can be more prone to stock theft.
3.6. Cage Culture
Cage culture for rainbow trout is an intensive
production system, where fish are stocked and fed in a
confined area. Unlike other production methods, the
water is continually exchanged in and out the cage by
natural currents or tides within the body of water. In
addition to this, the water volume, along with the
associated organisms occurring naturally in the body of
water act as a “natural bio-filter” system (Nerrie, 2013). According to DAFF (2015), fresh water cage
culture is a preferred farming method for trout internationally, as it is highly cost-effective when
optimal conditions are in place. However, in South Africa, cage culture for rainbow trout remains
underutilised and underdeveloped despite the potential it offers (DAFF, 2015). In South Africa, pilot
projects are currently in the process of being implemented for both freshwater and marine cage
culture to produce rainbow trout, however, access to published data is still somewhat limited.
Currently, the Royal Highlands Trout project in Lesotho produce rainbow trout using net pen
technology within the Katse Dam. The project experiences good growth rates and produces high-
quality fish due to the ideal production and environmental conditions. This type of cage culture has
been successful, and well implemented, and although the cages do discharge waste into the dam,
the Katse Dam, which is man-made, has a significant flushing factor which assists with moving water
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
25
through the dam to maintain the water quality. While the risk of escape and spread of diseases, is
posed a factor when using cage culture, these risks are mitigated through careful farm management
and stringent testing and monitoring by the Lesotho government. The farms are audited twice a year
to ensure the environmental impact is kept as low as possible, and additional regulatory frameworks
were implemented to efficiently manage the production of trout in the Katse Dam (WWF SASSI,
2018). These lessons from Lesotho can be implemented in South Africa with the purpose of
improving the development and usage of cage culture in the country.
Since rainbow trout require cool, clean water conditions, site selection for cage culture is essential.
According to Salie, et al. (2008), site selection plays a critical role in the success of any cage culture
operation. The following site requirements should be considered when selecting a site for cage
culture:
Carrying capacity of the dam/water body to be used,
Optimal water quality and conditions in the water body,
No upstream users (i.e. factories, mining areas or other potential pollution risk areas,
Proximity to hatchery (if obtaining fingerlings from hatchery),
Security to limit theft and/or vandalism,
Good access to the water body being selected for harvesting, and input provision,
Minimum depth of the dam should be five (5) meters to ensure the cages are free floating,
and prevent the build-up of waste underneath cages over the long-term,
Sufficient space from the base of the net to the bottom of the dam,
Wind exposure can increase water circulation through the cages, and
Stable water levels are ideal to ensure cages won’t be affected by fluctuating water levels.
According to studies done in the United States of America, the stocking density for rainbow trout in
cage culture systems should be between 10-13 kilograms/m³ as the low stocking densities result in
improved growth, lower mortalities, and better disease resistance (Weeks & Smith, 2014). In South
Africa, stocking densities can range from 20 to 50 kilograms/m³, thus a stocking density of 25
kilograms/m³ is used in the generic economic model.
Advantages of using Cage Culture for Rainbow Trout Farming
I. It is a well-known, commonly used production system,
II. Low technology and operational costs,
III. Cages can be made from various materials (net cages, constructed cages etc.),
IV. Can be done on a small, medium, or large scale,
V. High quality, “naturally” grown fish are produced,
VI. Production management is fairly simple, as it mainly consists of feeding and harvesting, and
VII. Cage culture has low labour requirements.
Disadvantages of Using Cage Culture for Rainbow Trout Farming
I. Requires a well-managed feeding programme, and is reliant on artificial feed sources
(usually floating pellets),
II. Cage maintenance is essential and requires careful management and monitoring,
III. Large-scale production can have negative impacts on water conditions and quality,
IV. Vandalism or theft of fish and infrastructure,
V. Control over natural predation and contact with wild fish species is limited,
VI. Pollution of the water body can result in high mortality rates, and
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
26
VII. Disease outbreaks from natural fish populations can affect the trout, and similarly trout
disease outbreak can affect natural fish populations.
3.7. Production System Summary
Having presented the advantages and disadvantages of the various culture systems for rainbow
trout production in South Africa, Table 3-1 below provides a summary for each production system
based on the literature discussed. The table provides an indication of whether or not a system is
viable from a production perspective. Although a system may be suitable for production, the generic
economic model was developed to assist with determining the financial viability of the potential
production systems; these results are discussed in the Financial Analysis Chapter.
Table 3-1: Trout Production Systems Summary
System System Overview System Status
Pond Culture
I. System is not entirely suitable for commercial production
II. Minimum technological requirements
III. Growth may not be at optimum level since trout thrive in
cool, clean flowing water
IV. Reliant on artificial feed sources, therefore high operating
costs
V. Currently being practiced in South Africa, although viability
is yet to be determined
Viable
Cages I. Currently being piloted in South Africa (Operation Phakisa
Projects) Viable
Aquaponic
I. This system has been barely tested in South Africa
II. No known literature on a local or international level
III. Difficult to make accurate technical assumptions for
economic model
Untested
RAS
I. The system has been tested in South Africa
II. Requires high operating costs (formulated feed,
temperature control, etc.)
III. Depends solely on artificial feed
IV. Rainbow trout cultured in RAS would be unlikely to escape
to natural waterways
V. Rainbow trout grow well in RAS, but fast-flow rates of
water would be required.
VI. Provide opportunities to reduce water usage
VII. May not be suitable for commercial grow-out operations
due to high operating cost
Viable
Flow-through
systems &
Raceways
I. Production under this system has been tested in South
Africa
II. The water current produced by the system is ideally
suitable for the production of trout
III. The fish grow in their natural habitat
IV. System is prone to drought especially when using a surface
water body
V. Surface water quality may be impacted by other activities in
the watershed area.
VI. System depends on natural conditions and environmental
events
Viable
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
27
System System Overview System Status
VII. System is suitable for commercial grow-out operations
Ranching N/A N/A
From the above table, the potential production systems that can be utilised in South Africa for the
production of rainbow trout are Flow Through Systems, Cage Culture, Pond Culture, Raceways and
Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS). While aquaponics was discussed above, this system
remains untested in South Africa, however the production system is not considered to provide
optimal conditions for trout production.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
28
4. Geographical distribution of Rainbow Trout in South Africa The most recent data available shows that the trout sub-sector accounts for roughly 82.43% of South
Africa ‘s total freshwater aquaculture production (DAFF, 2016). Trout farms are mainly located in the
Western Cape, Mpumalanga, Eastern Cape, and Kwa-Zulu Natal. Of these provinces, the Western
Cape accounts for the largest share of trout produced in South Africa. The second highest volume is
produced in Kwa-Zulu Natal, followed by the Eastern Cape Mpumalanga province, respectively.
According to the DEA (2014), the eastern escarpment stretching from the south-western Cape to
Northern Kwa-Zulu Natal is the most suited habitat for salmonids (DEA, 2014).
4.1. Suitability Assessment
Trout production in South Africa is limited by the high temperatures that are widespread throughout
the provinces, as well as the lack of suitable water for culturing. Trout requires cooler temperatures
between 12°C and 18°C which therefore, restrict the sites to small streams in higher altitude
catchment areas. Trout production is considered to be seasonal in South Africa, and typically occurs
during the winter months due to the seasonal variations that occur. As a result, much of the national
trout production is concentrated around:
I. The foot of the Drakensberg and Midlands areas of KwaZulu-Natal,
II. The higher regions of Mpumalanga,
III. The Amatola region of the Eastern Cape,
IV. The Drakensberg highlands, and
V. Upland regions of the Western Cape Province, as illustrated in Figure 4-1 below.
Figure 4-1: Suitable areas for trout in South Africa4
(Urban-Econ, 2018)
4 Based on the BRBA assessment for Rainbow Trout. Based on conductivity, altitude, the mean annual rainfall, the mean
annual air temperature, and the mean winter air temperature
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
29
4.2. Key Location and Site Requirements
There are many factors that can influence the success of a rainbow trout aquaculture enterprise. Site
selection is one of the most important factors. Once a good site is chosen, all efforts can go into
good production management and crises can be minimised significantly. Important factors that have
to be considered when selecting a specific site for culturing rainbow trout include:
I. Proximity to the hatchery to ensure that the juvenile fish (fingerlings) can be delivered to the
production unit in perfect health,
II. Security, to limit theft and vandalism,
III. Good access to the water body, to facilitate easy transfer of the juveniles to the cages, safe
transport of feed and equipment to the production unit, and a safe and fast harvest to
ensure the production of good quality fish,
IV. Where processing is considered, the processing facility should be near enough to maintain a
cold chain and allow the delivery of a fresh product,
V. Climate (water and environmental temperature),
VI. Slope and topography (flood-prone areas should be avoided),
VII. Soil type (applicable to pond culture systems), and
VIII. Proximity to market.
Along with the above-mentioned considerations, the most important issue is the quality of the water
source chosen for production. The quality of the water influences the fish’s growth (fish generally
grow faster in good quality water), the occurrence of diseases, and the taste and colour of the fish.
Factors that have an impact on the quality of the water quality include:
I. Temperature,
II. Oxygen levels,
III. Ammonia levels, and
IV. pH levels.
4.3. Key requirements for Profitability
The list below illustrates the optimal operational requirements, at a high-level, for the production of
rainbow trout to be profitable:
I. Hatchery (mainly because rainbow trout do not spawn naturally in culture systems),
II. Fast growing strain,
III. Suitable freshwater temperature,
IV. Suitable highland deep-water dam or lake,
V. Suitable feed supply,
VI. Appropriate water quality and quantity,
VII. Suitable site with correct soil type, slope, and topography,
VIII. Good farm management practices,
IX. Disease control and management,
X. Appropriate production technology,
XI. Economies of scale and consistent volume of production, and
XII. Access to market.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
30
5. Rainbow Trout Market assessment The section outlines the production and consumption trends of trout at a global and local level and
elaborates on the marketing channels, as well as discusses the industry’ main market requirements.
5.1. Production and Consumption
The following section considers the global, regional, and local supply, demand and consumption
trends and patterns for rainbow trout.
5.1.1. Global, Regional and Local Supply Analysis
The rainbow trout industry is dynamic and fast-growing. Globally, the industry has experienced a
rapid growth of approximately 400% from the 1980’s to 2015. Production levels have doubled from
about 150 000 tonnes in 1980 to roughly 300 000 tonnes in 1990. Further development of the
industry saw production grow to approximately 500 000 tonnes in 2000 and a record high of 760 000
tonnes in 2015, as illustrated in Figure 5-1 (FAO, 2016a).
Source: FAO, 2016a
Figure 5-2 below illustrates the top 20 producers of rainbow trout in the world.
Figure 5-2: Top 20 global producers of Rainbow Trout (2015)
Source: FAO, 2016a
As illustrated in Figure 5-2, Iran currently dominates the rainbow trout industry. In 2015 the country
recorded production volumes of 140 632 tonnes, which was approximately 20% of the global
production, followed by Turkey, Chile and Norway producing, 106 598, 94 717 and 72 921 tonnes
(15%, 13% and 10%) respectively. Furthermore, from Figure 5-2 it is also clear that the trout industry
- 20 000 40 000 60 000 80 000
100 000 120 000 140 000 160 000
ton
nes
-
100 000
200 000
300 000
400 000
500 000
600 000
700 000
800 000
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2015
ton
nes
Figure 5-1: Global Trout Production (1950 - 2015)
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
31
is not well developed in East and South-East Asia, and that production in that region is mostly found
in China and Japan. The core production regions of the global industry are: Europe, South America,
and the Middle Asia. The low growth of the Chile trout industry can be attributed to the salmonid
rickettsial septicaemia (SRS) disease outbreak which severely affected production. The disease
outbreak can be linked to ineffective farm management practices, lack of overall strategic planning,
and above all an unsuitable legislative and regulatory environment.
A closer historical look at the dynamics of the industry in terms of the top five global producers
reveals that Chile was the dominant leading country until 2013. Because of the dramatic drop of
production in Chile during 2013 along with the continued decline due to disease outbreaks, Iran has
positioned itself as a leading producer of rainbow trout as seen in Figure 5-3 below.
Figure 5-3: Top Five global producers of Rainbow Trout 2000- 2015
Source: FAO, 2016a
Furthermore, Table 5-1 below. Illustrates the significant growth that Iran and Peru’s trout industries
have experienced since 2000; Iran’s industry has grown with roughly 1463% and Peru’s industry with
approximately 2024%. These growth trends can be attributed to well strategized governance, strict
import and sanitary requirements and the utilization of available natural resources (Singh, 2016).
Table 5-1: Industry performances of selected key producers (2000-2015)
2000 2015 Shift (tonnes) Shift (%)
Iran 9 000 140 632 131 632 1463%
Turkey 44 533 106 598 62 065 139%
Chile 79 566 94 717 15 151 19%
Norway 48 778 72 921 24 143 49%
Peru 1 928 40 947 39 019 2024% Source: FAO, 2016a
Within the context of the African continent, trout production is dominated by South Africa, followed
by Lesotho, Kenya, Malawi, and Zimbabwe. Tanzania and Ethiopia have also reported to farm trout
but on a significantly smaller scale compared to other African countries. Trout production in Lesotho
is relatively new, starting in 2006 with a single large-scale commercial operation named Royale
Highlands Trout, which is a farm that operates in both Lesotho and Franschhoek in the Western
-
50 000
100 000
150 000
200 000
250 000
300 000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
ton
nes
Iran Turkey Chile Norway Peru
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
32
Cape. Production in Lesotho has rapidly increased over the past nine years and was estimated to
reach 1 000 tonnes during 2015, as illustrated in Figure 5-4 below (FAO, 2015).
Figure 5-4: Production of trout in Africa (2000-2015)
Source: FAO, 2016a
Currently, Royale Highlands Trout is one of two farms located in Lesotho, and is considered to be the
largest trout farm on the continent, with production of just over 1 500 tonnes in the Katse Dam
reported for 2016 (The African Journal, 2016). In South Africa, the trout industry is the biggest of the
freshwater aquaculture industries. It contributed approximately 82.43% to South Africa‘s total
freshwater fish production in 2015, recording a total production of 1497.30 tonnes.
Trout farms are predominantly located in the Western Cape (which accounts for approximately 50%
of total production), Mpumalanga, the Eastern Cape, and KwaZulu Natal. The South African trout
industry production includes both trout fish (sold as whole fresh or frozen and processed smoked
filet) and trout eggs for the industry, known also as “fertilised trout ova” (Weaver, 2013). Despite the
trout industry being well established in South Africa, the production figures indicate no substantial
growth since 20135 (DAFF, 2016). Possible explanations for the stagnation include inability to expand
due to limited environmental conditions and suitable locations for additional trout farms to be
developed (Personal Communication, Pete Britz and Peter Stubbs).
The South African trout industry is also characterised by a well-established processing sector,
operated by key players in the industry. Large scale processing plants (that have a total capacity of
approximately 5 000 tonnes/year) that receive fish from local farmers as well as imported fish from
Norway, are offering the local market value-added products such as smoked trout (Personal
Communication, Gerrie van der Merwe and Pete Stubbs). South Africa has an established market
supply chain with central distribution centres for most retail chains (e.g. Pick n Pay, Woolworths, and
Checkers). Other distribution channels require more logistical efforts regarding direct sales to
individual stores such as Food Lovers Market and the SPAR group (Personal Communication, Gerrie
van der Merwe and Peter Stubbs).
5 These figures were provided by the association and could be underestimated.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
33
5.1.2. Global, Regional and Local Demand Analysis
Global consumption of trout is growing fast, which has led to the rapid development of global supply
(as discussed in the previous section) in order to meet the growing demand. The biggest markets for
trout imports are shown in Figure 5-5 below. Japan and Russia account for approximately 28% and
23% of the global importation, respectively.
Figure 5-5: Major Trout Importers (2013)
Source: FAO, 2016a
Despite experiencing a decline in imports in recent years, the Japanese market, which is driven by
the highest consumption of fish per capita, remains the top importer of trout (FAO, 2016). The
Russian market is primarily a seafood market, with an average annual fish consumption of 22 kg per
capita and total imports of 885 000 tonnes of seafood and fish products worth $2.9 billion during
2014 (World Food Moscow, 2016). As the second biggest global importer of trout with nearly 58 000
tonnes imported, Russia’s demand for trout is continually growing as a result of increased
consumption of trout, mostly due to changes in consumer preference. Germany is considered to be
the biggest trout importer in the EU market with nearly 30 000 tonnes of trout imported during 2013
(FAO, 2016). During 2015, Germany was the largest market for smoked trout with a value of EUR
33.8 million, while the market for fresh trout was spread between Finland, France, Poland, and
Germany (EUMOFA, 2016). There is a global demand for producers to supply high quality salmon
and trout eggs. For salmon the main markets are Scotland, Norway, Chile, and Canada, whereas for
trout there has been a rapid increase in demand from countries such as Iran, Chile, Turkey and
Norway in recent years (Hambrey, 2016). In addition to this, the demand for trout caviar for human
consumption is growing at a rapid in Russian (Eurofish, 2005).
As illustrate in in Table 5-2 below, the size of the South African market is approximately 2 233.95
tonnes a year. South Africa has an established market for trout, which is mostly (about 55%) situated
in Gauteng; the rest of the market is mainly spread across urban areas in South Africa. Seasonal
consumption is found along the coastline during holiday periods (Personal Communication, Peter
Stubbs).
Table 5-2: Domestic consumption of trout (2015)
Domestic consumption 2,233.95 tonnes
Import of trout 756.65 tonnes
Export of trout 19.7 tonnes
Local production of trout 1497 tonnes
Source: DAFF 2017
01000020000300004000050000600007000080000
ton
nes
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
34
The local market is dominated by retail outlets such as Pick ‘n Pay, Woolworths and Checkers who
act as off takers for fresh whole fish as well as for added value products such as smoked or fillet
trout. Additional markets could include direct marketing to producer owned stores and linkages to
the well-established tourism businesses (e.g. wine-routes, coastal recreational shops, etc.). In
summary, the South African demand-supply balance indicates that local demand currently exceeds
local production levels. As a result, the industry relies on imports in order to meet local demand. It is
however expected that this trend will change in the next year or so as developments in local
production will enable the industry to meet local requirements (Personal communication, Peter
Stubbs).
5.2. Marketing channels
The marketing channels section provides an overview of the key global, regional and local trade
channels for trout, as well as specific details such as changes in trade over time and the value of the
trout trade. The generic economic model takes both local and international markets into
consideration and offers flexible pricing options which are dependent on the size of the fish being
produced and the target market identified. The pricing of the fish and the target market impact on
the financial results obtained when using the generic economic model, as these two factors play a
key role in determining the profitability of an operation. Therefore, understanding the markets,
pricing and preferred products for the market is essential.
5.2.1. Global Rainbow Trout Trade
The global trade channels can be defined around several key routes including Iran’s trade with
Russia and the Middle East, Turkey exporting into Europe, Norway exporting to China, trade
between Japan and the USA, Europe’s intra-trade (such as Denmark, France, Italy and Poland), and
Chile and Peru exporting to the USA and the EU markets as illustrated in Figure 5-6 below. Figure 5-6: Global Key trout producer’s countries and their main trade routes
Source: (FAO, 2016a; Personal Communciation, 2017)
The Russian political ban on EU producers, which was the response to the EU’s ban on Russia,
resulted in a major shift of trade between 2013-2016 (Lepke, 2017). Major changes included the
replacement of the dominant Norwegian supply (33% of Russian import) with China, Faroe Island,
and Chilean products as seen in Figure 5-7 below.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
35
Figure 5-7: Russian import structure by country between 2013 and 2016
Source: Lepke, 2017
Along with good price levels, the Japanese and the USA markets have significantly increased their
imports of trout from Norway which has led to a strong recovery in export revenues for the industry
(FAO, 2016b). The USA exports of fresh and frozen rainbow trout are small (set at 807 tonnes during
2015), mostly as local production is sold and consumed domestically. Imports of trout into the USA
are much more significant and have been increasing steadily, reaching a value of over USD 104
million in 2015, surpassing the value of domestic production (USD 96.4 million). Most of these
imports are from Chile and Norway, accounting for USD 65.2 and 19.4 million, respectively (Isaac,
2017).
The EU is almost self-sufficient in the production of trout, though its sufficiency decreased from 95%
in 2010 to 90% in 2013. Trade between EU countries concentrates on fresh products. Turkey’s
position as a key producer of trout is strengthened by its proximity to the EU market and its ability to
supply primarily frozen trout (EUMOFA, 2014). Germany’s total value for trade in 2016 was over EUR
70 million, whilst Poland’s was approximately EUR 30 million and France’s almost EUR 20 million
(EUMOFA, 2016). Trout from England, Wales and Northern Ireland faces intense global competition.
High quality freshwater trout from Denmark and Norway feed into higher value UK and European
markets. In addition to this, the markets experience increasing competition from marine cage grown
trout and salmon as well as mass pond production in countries such as Iran, Chile, and Turkey
(Hambrey, 2016). Denmark and Sweden account for 45% of the total export value in the EU, and
they experienced significant increases in their export value (14% and 54%, respectively) during early
2015 (EUMOFA, 2016).
5.2.2. Regional and Local Trade of trout
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
36
Figure 5-8: South Africa and Lesotho import and export trade routes (2015)
During 2015, the South African trout trade
was made up of a total of 756.65 tonnes
of imported trout products, which was
about 33% of the total local market
demand in South Africa. In contrast, South
Africa’s export market is underdeveloped
with roughly 19.7 tonnes of trout and
trout products exported. Exports from
South Africa is currently very limited,
mostly due to the lack of the NRCS testing
and therefore, the inability to issue export
permits and codes to any of the existing
farms (Personal Communication, Peter
Stubbs).
Import and export trade channels are
continental (such as with Lesotho,
Botswana, and Nigeria) and internationally
including Norway, Chile, and China as seen in in the figure above.
Lesotho’s trade is mostly focused on exports to Japan and to a lesser extent, exports to South Africa
(DAFF, 2016).
During 2015 South Africa imported an estimated value of R45.4 million in total. Norway was the
leading exporter to South Africa with 65% (mostly due to the free trade agreement with South
Africa) (Personal Communication; Peter Stubbs), followed by Lesotho with 19%, Chile with 14% and
Denmark with less than 1% (DAFF, 2016a). On the other hand, South African exports included both
fish products and trout eggs. The eggs where exported to countries such as Denmark, Peru, Czech
Republic, Georgia, Greece, Kenya, Russian, Slovenia and Uzbekistan (DAFF, 2016a). Trout eggs from
South Africa have a seasonal advantage as South Africa can supply eggs to Europe (and the northern
hemisphere) during our winter months/their summer months.
5.3. Rainbow Trout Market requirements
5.3.1. Global Markets
Trout is typically considered as a high-value species, with consumers finding it more attractive than
the common white fish products. The freshwater fish market is large because the flesh is soft and
delicate, white to pink in colour, with a mild flavour. There are many outputs from rainbow trout
culture, which include food products sold in supermarkets and other retail outlets, live fish for the
restocking of rivers and lakes for recreational game fisheries (especially in the USA, Europe, and
Japan), and products from hatcheries such as fertilized eggs and juveniles are sold to other farms
(FAO, 2017). Products for human consumption come in the form of fresh, smoked, whole, filleted,
canned and frozen trout that can be eaten steamed, fried, broiled, boiled micro-waved and baked.
Trout processing wastes can be used for fish meal production or as fertiliser (FAO, 2017).
The optimal harvest size varies globally: in the USA, trout are harvested at 450-600 grams, in Europe
at 1-2 kg; and in Canada, Chile, Norway, Sweden and Finland at 3-5 kg (from marine cages). Such
Adapted from DAFF, 2016
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
37
variations support the various value-chain and market requirements, whereby large fish are often
used for value-added products (e.g. fillets). Preferences in meat colour also vary globally with USA
preferring white meat, whilst Europe and other parts of the world prefer the pink meat generated
from pigment supplements in the fish food. Strict guidelines are in place for the regulation of
rainbow trout produced for consumption with respect to food safety. Hygiene and safe
transportation of fresh fish are critical (FAO, 2017). In the EU market, most trout are sold fresh (63%
in value and 74% in volume) or smoked (22% in value and 9% in volume); the remaining trout are
traded as frozen products between EU member states (EUMOFA, 2016). The average price in the EU
of both fresh and smoked trout was recorded at 4.17 EUR/kg and 11.52 EUR/kg, respectively during
early 2016 (EUMOFA, 2016). The average price of trout in Germany between 1998-2003 ranged from
USD 4.13/kg for fresh trout, to USD 4.17/kg for frozen trout (Nielsen, 2009).
5.3.2. The South Africa Trout Market
The primary trout products sold in the South African market are:
“Kilo Trout” (1.2 to 1.5 kg whole fish) and “Plate Size Trout” (300 to 400-gram whole fish).
Typically, these products are sold fresh, but are also often found as “Previously Frozen”
product (see image below). Prices are around R200/kg
Value-added products, such as smoked filleted trout packed in 200 grams, priced at R120 a
pack (i.e. R 600/kg) (see image below)
Live trout for recreational angling, which is an established industry in the country
Trout egg caviar and fertilised eyed ova for production aimed at the export market
The Western Cape primarily produces large trout and value-added products such as smoked trout
for the food service and retail industry with, whereas Mpumalanga trout producers tend to focus on
plate (300-400 grams) and live production (Weaver, 2013).
5.4. Barriers to entry and limitations of the market
Barriers to entry and market limitations are an important consideration when looking at the
feasibility of a product. Various aspects such as market saturation, trade barriers, market
competition and potential market restrictions are important for this market assessment. As the
South African trout industry is well-established, no market immaturity was noted.
5.4.1. Seasonality of Trout Production
As trout production in South Africa is primarily limited to the winter months in the Western Cape,
and summer months in Mpumalanga the production and supply of trout to the markets is seasonal.
Production and supply of trout peaks towards the end of winter and into early summer which results
in high supply volumes reaching the markets.
5.4.2. Market Saturation
At a global scale, the EU trout markets are largely saturated, as a result of local European production
and its status as “self-sustained” industry, as a result, South Africa should focus on targeting export
markets such as Japan and Russia. However, issues surrounding the NRCS testing and export permits
will need to be resolved first due to the fact that the freshwater sector is not currently regulated by
the DAFF, only the provincial environmental affairs departments. No indication of market saturation
exists yet in the local South African market, but the future expansion of the market may result in
local supply (including from Lesotho) exceeding local demand (Personal Communication Peter
Stubbs).
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
38
5.4.3. Competition
Globally, the trout industry does experience competition in various locations, such as within the EU
market, from the low production costing countries such as Chile and Turkey. Within the local
context, the biggest threat to the local industry is the import of bulk, cheap salmon from Norway,
Chile, Argentina, Scotland, and the UK. Salmon is often viewed by local consumers as a preferred
substitute product for trout and as a result, the local trout price has always shadowed that of
salmon. However, in recent years South African consumers shown some “trout loyal” behaviour
which has resulted in the price and demand for trout becoming steadier (Weaver, 2013).
5.4.4. Logistics Challenges
The existence of poor infrastructure (roads, cold chain systems for food preservation etc.) imposes
serious limitations on market distribution in many African markets. Cold chain infrastructure
including storage facilities and refrigerated track and trains, are lacking in the Sub-Sahara African
markets. This creates a critical bottle-neck in the transportation of fresh goods from the farms to
other potential African markets.
5.4.5. Trade Restrictions
With the exception of trout eggs, which is mainly exported, the local trout industry focuses on
supplying the local market. This is mostly likely as a result of the quality restrictions imposed by
international markets such as Japan, the EU, and the USA. A national monitoring system to certify
farmed products is currently lacking in South Africa. It should be noted that DAFF currently has a
finfish monitoring programme which aligns with international standards and has been implemented
for the marine finfish industry, however, as DAFF does not regulate the freshwater aquaculture
industry this programme does not include rainbow trout. The Aquaculture Development Bill
(currently in Parliament) aims to address this issue.
The lack of protection from imported goods has resulted in an influx of products from Chile
(although imports carry 25% import duty) and Norway, which has had an impact on local production
levels. Specifically, the free trade agreement that exists with Norway allows the importation of
products at cost-effective prices. Despite this, local production is still considered to be cheaper than
trout imports, which assists local farmers to maintain their position in the industry and offer lower
pricing. As previously mentioned, exportation is an issue, mostly due to the lack of the NRCS testing,
and the lack of aquaculture legislation covering the trout industry, thus the local industry’s inability
to issue export permits and codes to any existing trout farms is a challenge for producers (Personal
Communication, Peter Stubbs).
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
39
6. SWOT analysis and Mitigation measures This section provides a SWOT Analysis for the production of rainbow trout in South Africa as well as
includes high-level mitigation options to address the threats and weaknesses identified.
6.1. SWOT Analysis
Table 6-1 below presents potential strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats faced by the
rainbow trout industry in South Africa.
Table 6-1: Rainbow Trout Swot Analysis
Strengths Weaknesses
The trout industry is well established in South
Africa
There are existing markets for trout in South
Africa as well as across Africa
Consumer preference leading to high market
price
Recreational angling (tourism) and table fish
(dual-purpose)
Fast-growing and can be cultured at high
densities
Easily adapted to a variety of aquatic
environments including aquaculture conditions
Can be propagated artificially, which makes it
important for fish food production.
Disease free status: Currently (2018), South
Africa is relatively free of specific salmonid
diseases
High cost of artificial feed
Underdeveloped market channels
Initial investment is relatively high for
infrastructure and equipment
High risk of disease in the trout industry
Weak forward and backward linkages in the
value chain
Little or no tolerance for low oxygen or high
temperatures, which restricts their distribution
Fingerlings of rainbow trout are only obtainable
from hatcheries
Production is primarily seasonal due to
environmental condition (i.e. water
temperature etc.)
Opportunities Threats
Demand is increasing for trout as well as trout
eggs
SA has the potential to expand the industry in
order to meet current local demand, therefore
reducing its reliance on imports
The development of hatcheries can lead to
additional export opportunities of products
such as trout fry.
Potential to expand trout processing industry
Potential for RAS hatcheries to increase grow-
out period and supply of fingerlings in suitable
seasons
Potential to expand the culture of trout into
seawater which would address water
availability issues and seasonal production
challenges
Lack of suitable spaces for expansion of the
trout industry
Possible outbreak of viral diseases in South
African trout stocks through imports due to
poor border control
Potential risk of trout invading natural water
systems/eco-systems
Rainbow trout are regarded as alien invasive
species by conservation agencies
Costs of production may continue to increase
(electricity, feed, labour etc.)
Water scarcity in South Africa is a threat to
aquaculture
Changing climate may limit the areas suitable
for trout production
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
40
The generic economic model considered some of the key weaknesses and threats that could impact
on the profitability of a farm. The model assists with developing a risk profile for producers, which is
then used to determine interest rates and loan repayments based on education levels and skills, as
well as access to land, infrastructure, and facilities. Factors such as permits and veterinary costs are
also built into the model to mitigate the potential threat of disease outbreaks.
6.2. Mitigation Measures
The mitigation measures identified in Table 6-2 below aim to address the threats and weaknesses
identified in the SWOT analysis discussed above. It is essential for trout producers to take note of the
potential risks and weaknesses identified to ensure they can implement mitigation measures and
understand the potential challenges they may face.
Table 6-2: Rainbow Trout Mitigation Measures
Risks Identified Mitigation Measures
1. High Capital & operating
costs
Research and development focusing on improved
technologies, reducing feed costs, and designing systems
that are more cost-effective
Improved access to affordable and sustainable technology
suitable for production systems in South Africa
2. Underdeveloped market
channels
Focus on developing the local market
Developing NCRS testing and production regulations to
comply with the EU and USA market standards
Adopt DAFF finfish monitoring programme for freshwater
aquaculture
Identify potential markets within Africa
3. Disease & pest outbreak
Establish early warning and communication system
between government and trout producers to alert of any
disease outbreaks globally and potential outbreaks in
South Africa
Develop and implement disease and biosecurity guidelines
for trout production
Farmers should receive training and extension services
support to ensure that good farm management and
disease control measures are in place6
4. Access to inputs
Encourage engagement between current producers,
industry stakeholders and government departments
Focus on the development of the local value chain
Building a RAS hatchery to increase supply of fingerlings
which is limited due to seasonal temperatures. Increase
availability of fingerlings to new entrants that want to
focus on only the grow-out of trout
5. Permits & regulations
Include regulatory & permit requirements in guideline
document
Identify ways in which the permit/regulatory process can
6The Aquaculture Development Bill identifies the need for extension support.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
41
Risks Identified Mitigation Measures
be streamlined in order to better assist producers
6. Limited suitable production
areas
Research and development aimed at identifying strategic
areas for trout production in South Africa
Conduct pilot projects to test the suitability of various
systems and environments in South. For example, cage
culture in large scale dams or marine cage culture for sea
run trout.
7. Risk of trout landing up in
natural water
bodies/systems
Provide guidelines for system design as well as biosecurity
measures required within South Africa
Training and educating new trout producers on the risk of
escape from aquaculture operations
Conduct site visits to assess existing aquaculture
operations biosecurity measures
New trout operations should meet minimum standards
before being approved
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
42
7. Rainbow Trout Technical Assessment The technical assessment below provides a summary of the assumptions used within the economic
model for rainbow trout, as well as data presented in the species overview and biological
characteristics. Information covered in the technical assessment include:
Water conditions
Broodstock/Breeding
Genetic selection
Hatchery/fry production
Production performance
Additional information
Table 7-1: Rainbow Trout Technical Assessment
Latin Name Oncorhynchus mykiss
Common name Rainbow trout
Biological requirements
Salinity Less 10 ppt. Sea run trout projects are currently being tested/trialled.
Temperature
The optimal temperature for rainbow trout to produce and grow in is 16˚C, and
the range of temperatures that they can tolerate and survive in are between 6-
16˚C. Rainbow trout will start to show signs of stress at temperatures exceeding
21°C.
Broodstock/breeding
Spawning
Rainbow trout is known to spawn easy and the large number of fry can be easily
weaned on artificial diets. Rainbow trout in captivity can spawn all year around;
whereas in the wild they will only spawn once, in spring.
(Natural/induced)
Rainbow trout will not spawn naturally if in captivity; thus, juveniles must be
obtained either through artificial spawning in hatcheries or by collecting eggs
from wild stocks. At the time of hatching, the rainbow trout larvae will already
be well developed.
Egg size Females can produce up to 2 000 eggs per kilogram of body weight. The eggs are
relatively large ranging from 3-7 mm in size.
Genetic selection Selective breeding programmes have produced disease resistant trout (to
furunculosis)
Hatchery/fry production
Hatchery system
Eggs are incubated in trays or in Californian incubators, with a maximum of two
layers of eggs. Fertilised eggs should be kept in the dark, the water exchange
should be moderate (one renewal per hour, eggs should not move), and the
dissolved oxygen level kept at 100 percent saturation. The water temperature
should be stable and kept between 4 and 12°C. Dead (white) eggs should be
manually removed every day. At the eyed stage (typically 230 degree-days), eggs
can be manipulated again and sold.
First feed requirement
When the fry has almost completed their yolk reabsorption and started
swimming, they can be fed for the first time with artificial dry feeds (0.4 mm
diameter, 55% protein and 12% lipid content).
Hatchery survival Typically, 90%
Industry experts, stakeholders and
relevant literature sources provided the
technical information below. This
information may be subject to change.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
43
Production performance
Typical FCR 1.2:1 or 1:1 depending on the grow-out size.
Feed requirement
Rainbow trout feed have been modified, as the years passed by, with a variety
of compact nutritious pelleted diets for all life stages. These pellets are usually
high in fish oils, with over 16% fat. Addition of pigments in the food is important,
to give rainbow trout their distinctive pink colour.
Typical survival Typically, 75% to 85%
Typical growth rate The growth rate depends on ambient temperature. At 16°C, it is usually possible
to rear fish to a table size (30-40 cm) within nine months.
Stocking densities
Ponds: 18 kg/m³
RAS: 100 kg/m³ (under optimal production conditions)
Flow-through/Raceway: 40 kg/m³
Cage: 25 kg/m³
Disease Whirling disease is a disease that is caused by a virus that affects rainbow trout.
Production
Production system
Ponds: Earthen ponds
RAS: Plastic, circular grow-out tanks
Raceway: Concrete grow-out tanks operating on RAS technology
Flow-through: Linear, lined tanks with fast flowing water/currents
Cage: Floating cages in an open water body
Intensity Intensive systems are considered necessary in most situations to make the
operation economically attractive.
Main producers The main producers of rainbow trout globally are Iran and Turkey.
Processing and markets
Product form
Trout ova/eggs (mainly international markets)
Fresh: whole fish or fillets
Processed: Pate, smoked, frozen products
Recreational: hand caught, fresh, whole fish
Additional Information
Research and
development
There are national breeding programmes for genetic improvement of wild
stocks for improved aquaculture production including for rainbow trout in
Norway. In Africa, a major trout farm is under development in the Katse Dam in
Lesotho. Additional research is required on production systems and the
reduction of production costs. Market research and regulations are required to
grow the market and allow for exports to the EU and USA.
Environmental impacts
Impacts from flow-through systems are largely from disease treatment
chemicals, uneaten feed, and fish excreta, which can alter water and sediment
chemistry downstream of the farm. Elevated nutrients reduce water quality
(increasing biological oxygen demand, reducing dissolved oxygen, and increasing
turbidity) and increase the growth of algae and aquatic plants.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
44
8. Rainbow Trout Financial Analysis
8.1. Introduction
The generic economic model provides users with the opportunity to individual producer data,
proposed production volumes and scales and financial data. Through the model, the users will
receive financial outputs which include capital and operational costs and financial indicators which
will guide the user in determining whether the proposed aquaculture project is feasible, and a viable
investment opportunity. A high-level overview of the model process can be seen in the figure below.
Source: Urban-Econ, 2018
The generic economic model can be customised to provide results for individual producers based on
selections made with regard to the location of the aquaculture operation (at a provincial level), type
of operation (start-up or existing), the scale of operation, type of production system, size and pricing
of the trout, education level and type of financing that could be used to fund the proposed
aquaculture project.
8.2. Key Economic Model Assumptions
The generic economic model for trout was developed using data from various information sources,
consultations with various stakeholders and industry experts, and through inputs gathered at two
peer-review workshops conducted.
8.2.1. Production Assumptions
To develop the generic economic model, specific production assumptions for trout were identified
and utilised. Some key assumptions used can be seen in Table 8-1 below.
Table 8-1: Rainbow Trout Model Assumptions
Average cost of fingerlings R 3-50 per 20-gram fingerling
Average Feed Cost R18-00 per kg
Stocking density RAS – 100 kg/m³ (only achievable with optimal flow-rates &
oxygen)
Pond – 18 kg/m²
Cage – 25 kg/m3
Race/Flow – 40 kg/m3
Acceptable Monthly Mortality 1,2% per month
Selected Fish size 9 months/ 1.2-kilogram fish
Producers should be encouraged to establish relationships with suppliers to benefit from bulk prices,
specifically at larger tonnages.
Interface
Assumptions
System
Selection
OPEX
CAPEX
Financial
Analysis Final Output
Figure 8-1: Generic Economic Model Overview
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
45
It is important to note that the results below are unique for each system and based on the results
obtained from the generic economic model. The average selling price identified is based on the
stakeholder consultations and may not be identical to current market prices. When considering
Rainbow trout production it is essential to consider the target market, demand, and a realistic selling
price to ensure the project is sustainable.
The land size identified above is calculated based on the minimum infrastructure footprints. As each
aquaculture operation will differ according to layout, design, and infrastructure requirements, the
land size should be used as a guideline for the minimum size property.
The generic economic model accounts only for the sale of whole trout, sold directly from the farm to
either a third-party processors, retail markets or directly to consumers looking to purchase whole
trout. Should processing be required on a farm, additional capital will be required.
8.2.2. Capital Expenditure
The capital expenditure costs for rainbow trout production focused on the establishment of different
production systems suited for trout production in South Africa. The capital expenditure is
determined by the scale of production, and the selected production cycle length. Some of the key
factors to note include the following:
a. Pre-development costs for construction phase, concept design, specialist consultations,
town planning alignment (zoning, rezoning etc.), and development of bulk infrastructure
(roads, installation of electricity to the site, bulk water services etc.) were excluded from
the model as this is site specific and not suitable to model at a provincial level,
b. Land costs were included should an individual/business not have an existing farm. Based
on average farm prices for 2017/2018, a per hectare (ha) rate of R 246 346 was used,
c. Services such as the costs of water and electricity were included in the model, and vary
between the provinces,
d. Buildings such as storerooms, offices, cold storage, and a feed room were considered,
e. Aquaculture system costs focused on the development of infrastructure for the systems,
and additional equipment required.
f. Infrastructure costs are calculated as a once-off, lump sum amount to be spent in year
one, however a producer can choose to phase in production which would spilt the costs
up depending on how the production is phased in.
8.2.3. Operational Expenditure
Operational expenditure or working capital was determined by looking at the variable costs of
production, and fixed costs. Costs can be divided into fixed and variable costs. Variable costs include
fingerlings, fertilisers (where required), feed, transport, and water costs. It should be noted that it is
assumed that aquaculture producers in South Africa are currently not charged for water unless using
municipal water sources (DAFF, 2018). Fixed Costs include costs such as salaries, insurance,
electricity, legal/licensing costs, veterinary services, and general expenses (telephone, electricity,
health and safety apparel, stationery etc.). Reserve and unforeseen costs have also been included
(calculated at 2% of the variable cost total).
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
46
8.2.4. Scale of Production
From the generic economic model, two production volumes were identified, firstly the minimum
production volume indicates at what tonnage a producer would be profitable from when selling at
the average selling price identified in the model, and secondly, the optimal production tonnage was
identified, which indicates where the optimal return on investment and profitability is achieved
when selling at the lowest feasible selling price.
8.2.5. Market Information
An average farm gate price of R 59 per kilogram (kg) for 1-kilogram rainbow trout was identified
during stakeholder consultation. This price may differ depending on the market being supplied, size
and quality of the trout. The model assumes that the trout are sold live or fresh, and not as
processed goods.
8.3. Rainbow Trout Production Financial Overview
Table 8-2 below provides the financial and production assumptions used to conduct the financial
analysis on each of the potential production systems. As the generic economic model is based at a
provincial level, for this analysis, the Western Cape was selected as most trout farms in South Africa
are located within the province.
Table 8-2: Trout Financial and Production Assumptions
Province Western Cape
Market Local
Operational Status Start-up farmer with no existing farm, facilities, or infrastructure
Skills Level Formal education (certificate/diploma)
Financing Option Debt/Equity
Debt Percentage 20%
Interest Rate 8.25%
Selling weight 1.2 kilograms (9 months)
Additional Information
The models exclude the construction and development phase. The models
consider from when production starts.
Consulting, or specialist fees are not included in the model
Based on the assumptions above, the results obtained from the generic economic model are
presented below for rainbow trout.
8.3.1. Recirculating Aquaculture System
The recirculating aquaculture system (RAS) is considered to be one of the more expensive
production systems to establish and maintain due to the infrastructure requirements, and the need
for tunnels, specifically in South Africa due to the climatic conditions experienced.
8.3.1.1. Capital Expenditure
Table 8-3 below provides a summary of the infrastructure and built environment costs required to
establish a RAS for trout production.
Table 8-3: Capital Costs for a RAS
Production Scale Min. Profitable 40 tons Optimal 988 tons
Infrastructure (Buildings) R 1 188 400 R 3 849 990
Purchase of Land R 302 652 R 1 286 225
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
47
Production Scale Min. Profitable 40 tons Optimal 988 tons
RAS Infrastructure R 908 015 R 16 870 427
Additional equipment R 251 955 R 1 303 401
Total Capital Expenditure R 2 785 022 R 23 719 443
The RAS requires specialised and technologically based infrastructure and equipment to ensure
optimal production conditions for the trout can be achieved. The stocking density of 100 kg/m³ can
only be achieved when there are optimal production conditions which includes oxygen levels, flow-
rates, temperature and feeding. The model accounts for basic infrastructure requirements such as a
bio-filter systems, oxygen producing system when production exceeds 40 tons per annum, aerators,
and pumps to name a few elements.
8.3.1.2. Operational Expenditure
Table 8-4 below provides a summary of the operational costs required for trout production. The
operational expenditure is shown for the first year of operation.
Table 8-4: Operational Expenditure for a RAS (Year 1)
Production Scale Min. Profitable 40 tons Optimal 988 tons
Variable costs R 753 535 R 18 233 121
Fingerlings R 127 602 R 3 151 774
Feed R 503 933 R 12 447 147
Consumables – water quality R 6000 R 148 200
Fixed Costs R 934 366 R 7 300 065
Total Operational Costs R 1 687 902 R 25 533 187
Feed costs generally account for an estimated 40 to 60% of the total operational expenditure
(depending on the tonnage). Currently in South Africa, fish feed is manufactured by one or two key
commercial feed producers and sold at an average price of R18/kg.
8.3.1.3. RAS System Financial Overview
Table 8-5 below provides an overview of the capital expenditure required, as well as financial
indicators and a high-level overview of the production requirements including land size, estimated
number of fingerlings required in month one (1), and the estimated number of employees required
in the first year of production.
Table 8-5: RAS Financial Overview
Production Scale Min. Profitable 40 tons Optimal 988 tons
Financial Overview
Total Capital Expenditure R 3 930 520.80 R 38 683 580.80
Loan Amount – Working Capital R 1 145 498.00 R 14 964 137.40
Loan Amount - Infrastructure R 2 785 022.80 R 23 719 443.40
Profitability Index (PI) 1.05 14.47
Internal Rate Return (IRR) 8% 74%
Net Present Value over 10 years R 4 108 733.97 R 559 733 787.27
Payback Period (years) 20 20
Year until profitable 6 2
Production Overview
Minimum Farm Size Required 1.2 hectares 5.2 hectares
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
48
Production Scale Min. Profitable 40 tons Optimal 988 tons
Number of fingerlings required (Month 1) 3 038 75 042
Number of employees (Year 1) 4 35
The minimum profitable tonnage was identified at 40 tons per annum when selling the fish at R
59/kg. This RAS requires an estimated capital expenditure of R 3 930 520 to meet the minimum
profitable tonnage, while the optimal production level of 988 tons per annum would require a
capital investment of R 38 683 580 for a start-up producer.
8.3.2. Pond Culture
Based on the assumptions presented in Table 8-2, the following results were obtained from the
generic economic model. The tables below provide an overview of rainbow trout in a pond system.
While pond culture is used for rainbow trout production, as previously discussed, pond culture does
pose some challenges for trout production such as the poor water conditions, and the lack of moving
water/current can impact on the growth rates of the trout.
8.3.2.1. Capital Expenditure
Table 8-6 below provides a summary of the infrastructure and built environment costs required to
establish a pond culture system for trout production.
Table 8-6: Capital Costs for Pond culture
Production Scale Min. Profitable 47 tons Optimal 967 tons
Infrastructure (Buildings & Storage Dam) R 1 262 366 R 4 508 254
Purchase Land R 863 120 R 7 291 179
Pond culture system R 1 107 970 R 12 278 280
Additional equipment R 226 900 R 1 018 516
Total Capital Expenditure R 3 595 756 R 25 496 028
8.3.2.2. Operational Expenditure
Table 8-7 below provides a summary of the operational costs required for trout production. The
operational expenditure is shown for the first year of operation.
Table 8-7: Operational Expenditure for Pond culture (Year 1)
Production Scale Min. Profitable 47 tons Optimal 967 tons
Variable costs R 882 603 R 3 084 783
Fingerlings R 149 993 R 3 084 783
Feed R 592 121 R 12 182 582
Consumables – water quality R 7 050 R 145 050
Fixed Costs R 1 047 008 R 6 819 847
Total Operational Costs R 1 929 612 R 24 665 762
As previously mentioned, feed costs are a major factor to consider when looking at the profitability
of pond culture. Producers should carefully plan and implement feeding programmes to ensure
optimal consumption and minimal waste of the feed. Feed suppliers should also be encouraged to
assist farmers by considering bulk order discounts.
8.3.2.3. Pond Culture Financial Overview
Table 8-8 below provides an overview of the capital expenditure required, as well as financial
indicators and a high-level overview of the production requirements including land size, estimated
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
49
number of fingerlings required in month one (1), and the estimated number of employees required
in the first year of production.
Table 8-8: Pond Culture Financial Overview
Production Scale Min. Profitable 47 tons Optimal 967 tons
Financial Overview
Total Capital Expenditure R 4 891 815.70 R 39 900 386.14
Loan Amount – Working Capital R 1 296 059.68 R 14 404 357.21
Loam Amount - Infrastructure R 3 595 756.02 R 25 496 028.93
Profitability Index (PI) 1.13 13.41
Internal Rate Return (IRR) 9% 71%
Net Present Value over 10 years R 5 507 015.73 R 534 984 733.86
Payback Period (years) 20 20
Year until profitable 6 2
Production Overview
Minimum Farm Size Required 3.5 hectares 29.6 hectares
Number of fingerlings required (Month 1) 3 570 73 447
Number of employees (Year 1) 4 29
The minimum profitable tonnage was identified at 47 tons per annum when selling the fish at R
59/kg. It is estimated that the total capital expenditure will be R 4 891 815 to establish the system
and cover the working capital until the first sales take place in month nine (9). For the optimal
production level of 967 tons per annum would require a capital investment of R 39 900 386 for a
start-up producer. The need for a large land portion plays a role in the high capital expenditure
required to establish a pond culture system due to its extensive nature, and the costs of establishing
earthen ponds.
8.3.3. Cage Culture
Cage culture as a production method is vastly different from other production systems in terms of
the of the operational and capital expenditure costs specifically when looking at electricity and water
costs, as well as the need for the producer to purchase land since these systems are water based and
therefore require minimal land.
8.3.3.1. Capital Expenditure
The table below provides a summary of the infrastructure and built environment costs required to
establish a cage culture system for trout production.
Table 8-9: Capital Expenditure for Cage Culture
Production Scale Min. Profitable 38 tons Optimal 923 tons
Infrastructure (Buildings) R 1 165 000 R 3 678 000
Land Required R 256 068 R 701 100
Cage culture system R 536 741 R 10 981 915
Additional equipment R 359 048 R 1 020 157
Total Capital Expenditure R 2 338 858 R 16 419 173
8.3.3.2. Operational Expenditure
The table below provides a summary of the operational costs required for trout production. The
operational expenditure is shown for the first year of operation.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
50
Table 8-10: Operational Expenditure for Cage culture (Year 1)
Production Scale Min. Profitable 38 tons Optimal 923 tons
Variable costs R 703 058 R 17 021 026
Fingerlings R 121 222 R 2 944 420
Feed R 478 736 R 11 628 256
Water Quality Consumables R 5 700 R 138 450
Fixed Costs R 904 117 R 6 120 568
Total Operational Costs R 1 607 176 R 23 141 594
8.3.3.3. Cage Culture Financial Overview
The table below provides an overview of the capital expenditure required, as well as financial
indicators and a high-level overview of the production requirements including land size, estimated
number of fingerlings required in month one (1), and the estimated number of employees required
in the first year of production.
Table 8-11: Cage Culture Financial Overview
Production Scale Min. Profitable 38 tons Optimal 923 tons
Financial Overview
Total Capital Expenditure R 3 425 642.30 R 29 785 325.60
Loan Amount – Working Capital R 1 86 784.12 R 13 366 152.05
Loam Amount - Infrastructure R 2 338 858.18 R 16 419 173.55
Profitability Index (PI) 1.02 17.48
Internal Rate Return (IRR) 7% 83%
Net Present Value over 10 years R 3 508 727.56 R 520 573 889.90
Payback Period (years) 20 20
Year until profitable 6 2
Production Overview
Minimum Farm Size Required 1.1 hectare 2.8 hectares
Number of fingerlings required (Month 1) 2 886 70 105
Number of employees (Year 1) 4 24
The minimum profitable tonnage was identified at 38 tons per annum when selling the fish at R
59/kg. Cage culture is not as capital intensive as the other four systems, with an estimated R 3 425
642 required to meet the minimum profitable tonnage, while the optimal production level of 795
tons per annum would require a capital investment of R 29 785 325 for a start-up producer. The
costs associated with establishing and operating a cage culture operation are far lower than any of
the other systems, which is linked to less infrastructure requirements, much lower day-to-day
operational costs as well as a reduced demand for land, electricity, and additional expenses such as
heating and pumps.
8.3.4. Flow-through Systems
Flow-through systems differ from RAS or pond system as they require continuous, fast-flowing water
through the system. With this in mind, the model assumes that continuous pumping will be required
from a suitable water source, with additional measures such as heating equipment and tunnels
excluded from the costing as trout require cool, fast flowing water. Consideration should be made
for a settlement pond or wetland area to prevent environmental risks and degradation and reduce
the risk of fish from the aquaculture operation entering natural water bodies.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
51
8.3.4.1. Capital Expenditure
Table 8-12 below provides a summary of the infrastructure and built environment costs required to
establish a flow-through system for trout production.
Table 8-12: Capital Costs for a Flow-through System
Production Scale Min. Profitable 41 tons Optimal 939 tons
Infrastructure (Buildings) R 1 159 150 R 3 883 920
Purchase Land R 255 575 R 316 228
Flow-through system R 488 036 R 6 165 107
Additional equipment R 232 841 R 1 056 432
Total Capital Expenditure R 2 264 603 R 11 836 948
8.3.4.2. Operational Expenditure
Table 8-13 below provides a summary of the operational costs required for trout production. The
operational expenditure is shown for the first year of operation.
Table 8-13: Operational Expenditure for a Flow-through (Year 1)
Production Scale Min. Profitable 41 tons Optimal 939 tons
Variable costs R 766 141 R 17 493 934
Fingerlings R 133 486 R 3 057 152
Feed R 521 605 R 11 946 031
Consumables – water quality R 6 150 R 140 850
Fixed Costs R 953 034 R 7 404 635
Total Operational Costs R 1 719 175 R 24 898 569
As previously mentioned, feed costs are a major factor to consider. Producers should carefully plan
and implement feeding programmes to ensure optimal consumption and minimal waste of the feed.
Electrical consumption and costs can be a challenge when using flow-through systems, thus these
systems are often situated adjacent to fast flowing bodies of water (i.e. rivers) to reduce pumping
costs and ensure a constant supply of water is available.
8.3.4.3. Flow-through System Financial Overview
The table below provides an overview of the capital expenditure required, as well as financial
indicators and a high-level overview of the production requirements including land size, estimated
number of fingerlings required in month one (1), and the estimated number of employees required
in the first year of production.
Table 8-14: Flow-through Financial Overview
Production Scale Min. Profitable 41 tons Optimal 939 tons
Financial Overview
Total Capital Expenditure R 3 421 068.06 R 26 431 389.50
Loan Amount – Working Capital R 1 156 464.87 R 14 594 441.50
Loam Amount – Infrastructure R 2 264 63.18 R 11 836 948.01
Profitability Index (PI) 1.17 18.57
Internal Rate Return (IRR) 9% 86%
Net Present Value over 10 years R 3 997 068.48 R 490 905 080.46
Payback Period (years) 20 20
Year until profitable 6 2
Production Overview
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
52
Production Scale Min. Profitable 41 tons Optimal 939 tons
Minimum Farm Size Required 1 hectare 1.3 hectares
Number of fingerlings required (Month 1) 3 178 72 789
Number of employees (Year 1) 4 33
The minimum profitable tonnage was identified at 41 tons per annum when selling the fish at R
59/kg. It is estimated that R 3 421 068 is required to meet the capital expenditure requirements for
the minimum profitable tonnage, while the optimal production scale system for 939 tons per annum
would require a capital investment of R 26 431 689 for a start-up producer.
8.3.5. Raceway System
Raceway systems are assumed to operate in a similar manner to the RAS, with concrete tanks
accommodated under tunnels to assist with heating and reducing electricity costs. A key challenge
with raceways, as with the flow-through system, is identifying and accessing a suitable source of
water that will be able to meet production needs. Without a reliable water source, extra
consideration for water storage should be made, especially if proposing to implement a raceway
system in dry regions or regions experiencing water shortages.
8.3.5.1. Capital Expenditure
The table below provides a summary of the infrastructure and built environment costs required to
establish a raceway system for trout production.
Table 8-15: Capital Costs for a Raceway System
Production Scale Min. Profitable 45 tons Optimal 937 tons
Infrastructure (Buildings) R 1 200 100 R 3 797 340
Purchase Land R 294 995 R 605 897
Raceway system R 945 054 R 7 618 04
Additional equipment R 232 841 R 1 038 432
Total Capital Expenditure R 2 808 990 R 13 460 083
8.3.5.2. Operational Expenditure
The table below provides a summary of the operational costs required for trout production. The
operational expenditure is shown for the first year of operation.
Table 8-16: Operational Expenditure for a Raceway (Year 1)
Production Scale Min. Profitable 45 tons Optimal 937 tons
Variable costs R 840 652 R 17 456 679
Fingerlings R 146 509 R 3 050 641
Feed R 572 494 R 11 920 587
Consumables – water quality R 6 750 R 140 550
Fixed Costs R 1 029 523 R 7 010 238
Total Operational Costs R 1 870 176 R 24 466 917
As previously mentioned, feed costs are a major factor to consider when looking at the profitability
of a raceway operation. Producers should carefully plan and implement feeding programmes to
ensure optimal consumption and minimal waste of the feed. Feed suppliers should also be
encouraged to assist farmers by considering bulk order discounts.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
53
8.3.5.3. Raceway System Financial Overview
The table below provides an overview of the capital expenditure required, as well as financial
indicators and a high-level overview of the production requirements including land size, estimated
number of fingerlings required in month one (1), and the estimated number of employees required
in the first year of production.
Table 8-17: Raceway Financial Overview
Production Scale Min. Profitable 45 tons Optimal 937 tons
Financial Overview
Total Capital Expenditure R 4 061 637.60 R 27 729 502.69
Loan Amount – Working Capital R 1 252 647.67 R 14 269 419.27
Loam Amount - Infrastructure R 2 808 989.63 R 13 460 083.42
Profitability Index (PI) 1.05 17.81
Internal Rate Return (IRR) 8% 84%
Net Present Value over 10 years R 4 274 362.17 R 493 885 359.70
Payback Period (years) 20 20
Year until profitable 6 2
Production Overview
Minimum Farm Size Required 1.2 hectares 2.5 hectares
Number of fingerlings required (Month 1) 3 488 72 634
Number of employees (Year 1) 4 33
The minimum profitable tonnage was identified at 45 tons per annum when selling the fish at R
59/kg. It is estimated that R 4 061 637 is required to establish the raceway system and cover
operational expenses when producing 45 tons per annum. The optimal production level of 937 tons
per annum would require a capital investment of R 27 729 502 for a start-up producer. The costs
associated with establishing and operating a raceway system are namely operational costs and
concrete tanks required.
8.4. Financial Analysis Summary
Based on the financial analysis conducted for each of the five (5) production system above, it is
evident that each system offers advantages and disadvantages for producers. The table below
provides a high-level summary of the capital expenditure required for the minimum profitable
tonnage, and the estimated return on investment.
Table 8-17: Summary: Production Systems Financial Overview
RAS Pond Cage
Flow-
Through Raceways
Min Profitable scale 40 47 38 41 45
Average Selling Price R 59/kg R 59/kg R 59/kg R 59/kg R 59/kg
Capital Expenditure R 3 930 520 R 4 891 815 R 3 425 642 R 3 421 068 R 4 061 637
IRR 8% 9% 7% 9% 8%
From a financial aspect, it is clear that cage culture and flow-through systems require the lowest
capital expenditure to establish at both the minimum profitable tonnage. While cage culture offer
producers reduced operating expenses, the system comes with several challenges, namely
identifying and securing a suitable body of water (cold, clean, and fresh), as well as maintaining the
cage culture system to ensure the sustainability of the selected water body and surrounding natural
environment.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
54
Pond and Raceways are the two most capital-intensive systems to establish, which is linked to the
grow-out containment construction, specifically for the construction/development of earthen ponds.
While flow-through systems are one of the least capital-intensive systems to establish, the high
operational expenses from pumping and need for access to a reliable and constant water source
may pose some challenges for producers.
8.5. Rainbow Trout Cost Benefit Analysis
Table 8-18 below shows a high-level cost benefit analysis for rainbow trout, based on the
profitability index (PI) which is used as the cost benefit ratio. The analysis considers the five (5)
production systems, at both one and ten tonnes respectively in the Western Cape province. The
cost-benefit analysis was considered using the equity finance option.
Table 8-18: Rainbow Trout Cost Benefit Analysis
RAS Pond Cage
Flow-
Through Raceways
Minimum Profitable Tonnage
Market price (R/kg) R 59/kg R 59/kg R 59/kg R 59/kg R 59/kg
Tons produced/annum 40 47 38 41 45
Profitability Index (PI) 1.05 1.13 1.02 1.17 1.05
Internal Rate of Return (IRR) 8% 9% 7% 9% 8%
Employees required (Year 1) 4 4 4 4 4
Optimal Tonnage
Market price (R/kg) R 59/kg R 59/kg R 59/kg R 59/kg R 59/kg
Tons produced/annum 988 967 923 939 937
Employees required (Year 1) 35 29 24 33 33
From the table above, it can be seen that all of the five (5) production systems are profitable and
feasible for rainbow trout production in the Western Cape. However, although each of the systems
is profitable, each one offers unique challenges and advantages for producers which should be
carefully considered when selecting a production system.
Out of the five (5) systems above, it can be seen that cage culture, flow-through and RAS are the
most profitable systems. From the results presented above, the raceway systems and RAS prove to
be the least profitable of the five (5) systems, which can be attributed to the high operational costs
as well as capital expenditure required for the system. Pond culture can be successfully used for
trout production; however, the slower growth rates and the lower stocking density should be noted.
While cage culture offers the lowest return on investment, the minimum profitable tonnage is much
lower than the other four (4) systems. At 40 tons, cage culture offers an IRR of 13%, thus making it
the most profitable system.
Each system offers a number of employment opportunities, specifically at the higher tonnages,
where more specialised and skilled employees can be used as the operation will be able to cover
their salaries. At the lower tonnages, it is recommended that labour costs are kept to a minimum to
ensure the operation is profitable, thus all systems offer four (4)) jobs in year one of operation. The
most labour-intensive systems at the higher tonnages, as seen in the table above, include RAS, flow-
through and raceway systems which are more intensive culture systems, while cage culture requires
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
55
the lowest number of permanent employees in year one (1). Although cage culture requires the
lowest number of permanent employees, temporary or seasonal employees may be required when
sorting/grading or harvesting depending on the scale of operation.
8.6. Rainbow Trout Best Case Scenario
Through the generic economic models, it is possible to determine “Best Case Scenarios” for each of
the four recommended production systems at a provincial level. To do this, the following categories
and criteria were used to assess the economic models.
I. Selling weight: Presently two marketable sizes of rainbow trout have been identified in
South Africa, namely plate sized fish (300 grams), and more commonly one (1) kilogram
sized fish. For the ‘best-case’ scenarios, a 1.2 kg trout is selected in the generic economic
model.
II. Minimum Tonnage required for each production cycle: The minimum tonnage was
identified determining the amount that a trout producer needs to produce in order to be
profitable. Profitability was measured by looking at the Profitability Index (PI), which should
be one (1) or more.
III. Price: The farm gate price received for rainbow trout has a major impact on the profitability
and sustainability of the aquaculture operation. The minimum recommended selling price
differs for each production system and is affected by the annual production volume
selected.
IV. Finance Type: The generic economic model provides three financing options for producers,
however for this analysis the debt/equity finance option was selected with a 20% debt ratio.
This assumes that a producer contributes 20% of their assets and receives funding for the
remaining 80%.
When making use of the generic economic model for rainbow trout it should be noted that the
figures and analysis discussed below are based at a provincial level and were obtained with the
general assumptions used in the economic model. While at a provincial level a system and tonnage
may show a positive or negative return on investment or profitability index, this may differ at a site-
specific level depending on the site temperatures and conditions, water quality and temperature,
access to markets and access to input supplies, which all have a significant impact on the profitability
and viability of an aquaculture operation.
As previously mentioned all five (5) production systems have proven to be profitable for rainbow
trout when using the general assumptions in the generic economic model. The table below provides
an overview for the ‘best-case scenarios’ for each of the production systems based on a farm gate
price of R 59/kg and the minimum profitable tonnage required when making use of the average
selling price.
Table 8-19: Best Case Scenario Summary
RAS Pond Cage Flow-through Raceway
EC R 59/kg R 59/kg R 59/kg R 59/kg R 59/kg
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
56
RAS Pond Cage Flow-through Raceway
40 tons 47 tons 38 tons 41 tons 45 tons
Climate
Suitability
Only select
regions in the EC -
escarpment/Drak
ensberg
Only select
regions in the EC -
escarpment/Drak
ensberg
Only select
regions in the EC -
escarpment/Drak
ensberg
Only select
regions in the EC -
escarpment/Drak
ensberg
Only select
regions in the EC -
escarpment/Drak
ensberg
KZN R 59/kg
40 tons
R 59/kg
47 tons
R 59/kg
38 tons
R 59/kg
41 tons
R 59/kg
45 tons
Climate
Suitability
Only select
regions in KZN –
escarpment/Drak
ensberg
Only select
regions in KZN –
escarpment/Drak
ensberg
Only select
regions in KZN –
escarpment/Drak
ensberg
Only select
regions in KZN –
escarpment/Drak
ensberg
Only select
regions in KZN –
escarpment/Drak
ensberg
GP R 59/kg
40 tons
R 59/kg
47 tons
R 59/kg
38 tons
R 59/kg
41 tons
R 59/kg
45 tons
Climate
Suitability
Water
cooling/heating
required
depending on
season
Water
cooling/heating
required
depending on
season
Site & Dam
specific. Water
and air
temperatures may
be too warm.
Site specific.
Water and air
temperatures may
be too warm
Site specific.
Water and air
temperatures may
be too warm
WC R 59/kg
40 tons
R 59/kg
47 tons
R 59/kg
38 tons
R 59/kg
41 tons
R 59/kg
45 tons
Climate
Suitability
Water
cooling/heating
required
depending on
season
Water
cooling/heating
required
depending on
season
Site & Dam
Specific. Is
currently used
successfully.
Water
cooling/heating
required
depending on
season
Water
cooling/heating
required
depending on
season
NC R 59/kg
73 tons
R 59/kg
71 tons
R 59/kg
65 tons
R 59/kg
69 tons
R 59/kg
72 tons
Climate
Suitability
Only certain
regions in NC may
be suitable. Water
cooling required
during summer
months
Only certain
regions in NC may
be suitable. Water
cooling required
during summer
months
Site & Dam
specific. Water
and air
temperatures may
be too warm.
Only certain
regions in NC may
be suitable. Water
cooling required
during summer
months
Only certain
regions in NC may
be suitable. Water
cooling required
during summer
months
MP R 59/kg
45 tons
R 59/kg
60 tons
R 59/kg
55 tons
R 59/kg
59 tons
R 59/kg
61 tons
Climate
Suitability
Only certain
regions in MP may
be suitable. Water
cooling required
during summer
months
Only certain
regions in MP may
be suitable. Water
cooling required
during summer
months
Site & Dam
specific. Water
and air
temperatures may
be too warm.
Only certain
regions in MP may
be suitable. Water
cooling required
during summer
months
Only certain
regions in MP may
be suitable. Water
cooling required
during summer
months
FS R 59/kg
45 tons
R 59/kg
60 tons
R 59/kg
55 tons
R 59/kg
59 tons
R 59/kg
61 tons
Climate
Suitability
Only certain
regions in FS may
be suitable. Water
cooling/heating
required
depending on
season
Only certain
regions in FS may
be suitable. Water
cooling/heating
required
depending on
season
Site & Dam
specific. Water
and air
temperatures may
be too warm in
Summer
Only certain
regions in FS may
be suitable. Water
cooling/heating
required
depending on
season
Only certain
regions in FS may
be suitable. Water
cooling/heating
required
depending on
season
LP R 59/kg
45 tons
R 59/kg
60 tons
R 59/kg
55 tons
R 59/kg
59 tons
R 59/kg
61 tons
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
57
RAS Pond Cage Flow-through Raceway
Climate
Suitability
Water cooling
required
Water cooling
required
Site & Dam
specific. Water
and air
temperatures may
be too warm.
Site specific.
Water and air
temperatures may
be too warm
Site specific.
Water and air
temperatures may
be too warm
NW R 59/kg
45 tons
R 59/kg
60 tons
R 59/kg
55 tons
R 59/kg
59 tons
R 59/kg
61 tons
NW
Water
cooling/heating
required
depending on
season
Water
cooling/heating
required
depending on
season
Site & Dam
specific. Water
and air
temperatures may
be too warm.
Site specific.
Water and air
temperatures may
be too warm
Site specific.
Water and air
temperatures may
be too warm
From the table above, it is evident that provinces such as the Eastern Cape, Western Cape, Kwa-Zulu
Natal, and Gauteng offer the most profitable trout producing conditions, however, it should be
noted that trout production is limited to select areas within these provinces. These areas offer the
necessary climatic and water conditions required for trout production as previously discussed. While
the Gauteng is expected to be profitable, the climatic conditions are not optimal for trout
production, specifically in the summer months, thus, additional heating and/cooling equipment may
be required which could result in higher operating expenditure. Site specific design and
infrastructure needs must be considered. Mpumalanga is known for rainbow trout production,
however, when considering the distance to markets and access to inputs, aspects such as transport
costs should be considered.
The Northern Cape province proves to be the least suitable province for rainbow trout production,
which is attributed to the distance from major city centres (and markets), and the high temperatures
which affects the operational expenditure.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
58
9. Conclusion and Recommendations
9.1. Conclusion
Rainbow trout is a well-known and widely used fish in aquaculture operations, both locally and
internationally. Water and environmental conditions, specifically the need for high quality, clear
water, and cool temperatures, is essential for successful production of trout in South Africa;
however, these factors also limit the number of sites suitable for the production of rainbow trout. In
South Africa, trout production is very seasonal, and limited to the cooler, winter months, which
affects the production and supply of trout, as it is not produced year-round.
The current research and development underway to test and pilot various production systems in
South Africa could go a long way in ensuring the long-term success and growth of the industry, since
it will allow for alternative methods of production to be implemented, which in turn will allow for
increased production. There however exists some concern over the proposed change of the
legislation in terms of the NEMBA classification of rainbow trout as a Category two (2) invasive
species, as this will mean that additional permits will be required for aquaculture operations
producing rainbow trout. Although this is already the case with other freshwater species, permit
applications and authorisations can be a lengthy and costly process for producers, which may affect
production, specifically for the small-scale farmers.
Although the trout industry has for a while been established in South Africa, it is still considered to
underdeveloped from an international perspective. Very few large-scale operations exist in South
Africa and the majority of the farms currently operate on a small scale. The local market is stable and
responsive, however, further marketing and engagement to increase the demand is required. Export
markets that should be considered including markets in Japan, Russia, and the USA. It is essential
that the South African trout industry is able to differentiate itself from the other key competitors
(e.g. Japan) by developing and implementing quality standards, unique packaging, branding, and
value addition offerings. Challenges regarding export permits and certification of farms should be
addressed as soon as possible to assist and support the expansion of the trout market. Lastly, the
production and volume of trout eggs for export is increasing however, more effective marketing is
required to assist with the growth of the industry.
Based on financial analysis and best-case scenario analysis, it can be seen that cage, flow-through
and pond culture are the most profitable systems for rainbow trout production, with raceways being
the least profitable system based on the average selling price required for an operation to be
profitable. it is clearly illustrated that provinces such as the Eastern Cape, Western Cape, Kwa-Zulu
Natal, and Gauteng offer the most profitable trout producing conditions, however, it should be
noted that trout production is limited to select areas within these provinces. These areas offer the
necessary climatic and water conditions required for trout production as previously discussed. The
Northern Cape province proves to be the least suitable province for rainbow trout production, which
is primarily linked to the climatic conditions experienced in the province.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
59
9.2. Recommendations
Based on the study conducted, the following recommendations have been made:
I. Strategic guidelines for rainbow trout production should be developed to assist new
entrants to the industry. These guidelines should cover:
a. South African specific production guidelines and information,
b. Post-production marketing regulations and standards,
c. Transportation of rainbow trout, and
d. Production system information.
II. Research and development into alternative production systems and system design,
specifically looking at sea run rainbow trout,
III. Research and analysis on the production and pricing of trout feed in South Africa. Producers,
government, and suppliers should enter into discussion to ensure prices are competitive and
affordable for producers,
IV. Due to seasonality of trout, and limited availability of fingerlings, specifically new entrants
could be addressed by the development of trout hatcheries using a RAS. This could assist
new entrants and increase production,
V. Improved co-ordination and communication between trout producers, stakeholders and
government would assist with the development and growth of the industry,
VI. Develop as well as implement testing and regulatory standards to ensure that South Africa
can supply the EU and USA market,
VII. Adopt/amend the DAFF finfish monitoring programme for freshwater fish in South Africa,
VIII. Permit and regulatory processes should be clarified, specifically the proposed amendment of
the AIS category of trout,
IX. The permit and regulatory process should be streamlined to ensure producers can apply for
permits effectively, without experiencing lengthy delays and red tape,
X. Determine the need for clustering of small-scale producers to assist with economies of scale,
as well as the potential to develop agro-processing facilities where clusters of producers are
located,
XI. The rainbow trout generic economic model should be updated annually to ensure that the
assumptions and costings are accurate. The updates will ensure the long-term use and
sustainability of the generic economic model, and
XII. Investigate alternative approaches to developing the trout industry in South Africa, such as:
a. Integrated farming, and
b. Aquaculture-tourism farm – educational facilities mixed with stores and recreational
facilities.
The Aquaculture Development Bill (currently in Parliament) should alleviate a number of challenges
with red tape and delays experienced in the aquaculture industry, as well as assist with addressing a
number of production, support, and marketing issues. These recommendations should be reviewed
should the Aquaculture Development Bill be passed to ensure they are addressed and implemented
where applicable.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
60
10. References DAFF, 2015. Application for an Experimental Permit to Engage in Research on the suitability of
Vanderkloof dam for Rainbow trout culture, Pretoria: Unpublished.
DAFF & WRC, 2010. A Manual For Rural Freshwater Aquaculture, Pretoria. South Africa: Water
Research Commission.
Davidson, J. et al., 2014. Growth Performance, Fillet Quality, and Reproductive Maturity of Rainbow
Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Cultured to 5 Kilograms within Freshwater Recirculating Systems. J
Aquac Res Development, 5(4), pp. 1-9.
DEA, 2014. Risk assessment for rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss in South Africa, Pretoria: DEA.
FAO, 2014. Small-scale Aquaponic Food Production: Integrated Fish and Plant Farming.Food and
Agriculture Organisation Of The United Nations.
FAO, 2017. Cultured Aquatic Species Information Programme. Oncorhynchus mykiss. Cultured
Aquatic Species Information Programme . Text by Cowx, I. G. In: FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture
Department [online]. Rome. Updated 15 June 2005. [Cited 28 September 2017]..
Helfrich, L. A. & Libey, G., 2013. Fish Farming in Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS), Blacksburg,
Virginia: Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences. Virginia Tech..
Jokumsen, A. & Svendsen, L. M., 2010. Farming of Freshwater Rainbow Trout in Denmark , s.l.: s.n.
Joshi, P. L. & Westlund Lofvall, L. M., 1996. Production technology and prospects of trout farming in
Nepal. In: 1997. Proceedings of the National Symposium on the Role of Fisheries and Aquaculture in
the Economic Development of Rural Nepal, 15-16 August 1996., s.l.: s.n.
Klontz, G., 1991. Manual for Rainbow Trout Production on the Family-Owned Farm, Idaho: University
of Idaho.
Molony, B., 2001. Environmental requirements and tolerances of Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus
mykiss) and Brown trout (Salmo trutta) with special reference to Western Australia: A review, North
Beach, Western Australia: Department of Fisheries.
Muradian, M., 2016. Average dissolved oxygen requirements for salmonids. [Online]
Available at: https://henrysfork.org/average-dissolved-oxygen-requirements-salmonids
[Accessed 13 September 2018].
National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development, 2016. Theme Paper On Trout Farming,
Mumbai: National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD).
Nerrie, B., 2013. Cage Trout Production. Virgina: Virgina State University.
Noble, A. C., 2004. Major Diseases Encountered in Rainbow Trout Reared in Recirculating
Aquaculture Systems, West Virginia: The Conservation Fund's Freshwater Institute.
NRCS & WHC, 2000. Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Fish and Wildlife Management Leaflet.
Volume 13.
Rakocy, J. E., Shultz, R. C., Bailey, D. S. & Thoman, a. E. S., 2004. Aquaponic Production of Tilapia and
Basil: Comparing a Batch and Staggered Cropping System. Acta horticulturae, 648(648), pp. 63-69.
Salie, K., Resoort, D., du Plessis, D. & Maleri, M., 2008. Training Manual for Small-Scale Rainbow
Trout farmers in net cages on irrigation dams : water quality, production and fish health, Pretoria:
Water Research Commission.
Salie, K., Resoort, D., du Plessis, D. & Maleri, M., 2008. Training Manual for Small-Scale Rainbow
Trout Farmers In Net Cages On Irrigation Dams: Water Quality, Production And Fish Health, Pretoria:
Water Research Commission.
Weeks, C. & Smith, D., 2014. On the Brink of Trout Cage Culture. Ohio, North Central Aquaculture
Conference.
RAINBOW TROUT FEASIBILITY STUDY FINAL 2018 8
61
Woynarovich, A., Hoitsy, G. & Moth-Poulsen, T., 2011. Small-scale Rainbow Trout Farming, Rome:
Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations.
WWF SASSI, 2018. WWF SASSI - Rainbow Trout. [Online]
Available at: http://wwfsassi.co.za/fish-detail/108/
[Accessed 5 March 2018].
Top Related